<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (12) TMI 537 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762957</link>
    <description>NCLAT dismissed the appeal regarding security interest relinquishment under IBBI Liquidation Regulations. The appellant had informed the liquidator of its decision to relinquish security interest but later attempted to realize it without paying required CIRP and liquidation costs. Despite agreeing to joint asset sale in lenders&#039; meetings, the appellant failed to pay proportionate liquidation costs when demanded. The tribunal held that Regulation 21A(2)(3) applied, making the security interest relinquished due to non-payment. The adjudicating authority correctly refused relief to the appellant, and NCLAT found no grounds for appellate interference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2024 08:15:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=781943" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 537 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762957</link>
      <description>NCLAT dismissed the appeal regarding security interest relinquishment under IBBI Liquidation Regulations. The appellant had informed the liquidator of its decision to relinquish security interest but later attempted to realize it without paying required CIRP and liquidation costs. Despite agreeing to joint asset sale in lenders&#039; meetings, the appellant failed to pay proportionate liquidation costs when demanded. The tribunal held that Regulation 21A(2)(3) applied, making the security interest relinquished due to non-payment. The adjudicating authority correctly refused relief to the appellant, and NCLAT found no grounds for appellate interference.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762957</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>