<?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>2025 (1) TMI 229 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764167</link>
    <description>The NCLAT dismissed an appeal challenging rejection of a belated claim in corporate insolvency proceedings. The appellant filed their claim on 12.09.2023, approximately 548 days after the 27.12.2021 deadline set in the public announcement, well beyond the extended 90-day period under CIRP Regulations. The tribunal held that the Resolution Professional acted properly in rejecting the claim, noting that surprise claims should not be imposed on resolution applicants and that RPs lack adjudicatory powers. The court emphasized adherence to statutory timelines is essential for timely resolution processes and found no irregularity in the RP&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Jan 2025 08:44:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=786417" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 229 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764167</link>
      <description>The NCLAT dismissed an appeal challenging rejection of a belated claim in corporate insolvency proceedings. The appellant filed their claim on 12.09.2023, approximately 548 days after the 27.12.2021 deadline set in the public announcement, well beyond the extended 90-day period under CIRP Regulations. The tribunal held that the Resolution Professional acted properly in rejecting the claim, noting that surprise claims should not be imposed on resolution applicants and that RPs lack adjudicatory powers. The court emphasized adherence to statutory timelines is essential for timely resolution processes and found no irregularity in the RP&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764167</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>