<?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>Related Party Under Section 5(24) IBC Removed from Committee of Creditors Due to Common Control Structure</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85423</link>
    <description>Resolution Professional&#039;s decision to remove appellant from Committee of Creditors upheld by NCLAT. The appellant, Hari Vitthal Mission, was determined to be a related party of Corporate Debtor under Section 5(24) of IBC due to common control by Kanoria Foundation. Kanoria Foundation held 99.9% stake in appellant and effectively controlled 31% of Corporate Debtor through intermediary entities. The tribunal confirmed RP&#039;s authority to determine related party status and endorsed findings that appellant qualified as related party under Section 5(24)(i) and (j), being a subsidiary of the same holding company/trust controlling Corporate Debtor. As related parties are prohibited from CoC participation under Section 21(2), appellant&#039;s removal was legally justified. Appeal dismissed, affirming Adjudicating Authority&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2025 08:13:17 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2025 08:13:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=794933" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Related Party Under Section 5(24) IBC Removed from Committee of Creditors Due to Common Control Structure</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85423</link>
      <description>Resolution Professional&#039;s decision to remove appellant from Committee of Creditors upheld by NCLAT. The appellant, Hari Vitthal Mission, was determined to be a related party of Corporate Debtor under Section 5(24) of IBC due to common control by Kanoria Foundation. Kanoria Foundation held 99.9% stake in appellant and effectively controlled 31% of Corporate Debtor through intermediary entities. The tribunal confirmed RP&#039;s authority to determine related party status and endorsed findings that appellant qualified as related party under Section 5(24)(i) and (j), being a subsidiary of the same holding company/trust controlling Corporate Debtor. As related parties are prohibited from CoC participation under Section 21(2), appellant&#039;s removal was legally justified. Appeal dismissed, affirming Adjudicating Authority&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2025 08:13:17 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85423</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>