<?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 (5) TMI 582 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770310</link>
    <description>NCLAT dismissed appeal challenging resolution plan approval. Appellant contested financial creditors&#039; claim amounts and RP&#039;s conduct, alleging manipulation and artificial inflation of claims. NCLAT held suspended management lacked locus to challenge creditor claims when both financial creditors in CoC were satisfied with each other&#039;s claims. Regarding non-disclosure of leased land status, NCLAT found no lease deed breach as Government of Odisha raised no objections and RP complied with all directions. Court upheld that valuation report sharing with non-CoC members wasn&#039;t mandatory under CIRP regulations. Resolution plan approved with 100% CoC vote share was deemed compliant with IBC provisions. NCLAT reaffirmed limited judicial review scope, emphasizing CoC&#039;s commercial wisdom primacy in resolution plan approval.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 May 2025 09:12:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=820629" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 582 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770310</link>
      <description>NCLAT dismissed appeal challenging resolution plan approval. Appellant contested financial creditors&#039; claim amounts and RP&#039;s conduct, alleging manipulation and artificial inflation of claims. NCLAT held suspended management lacked locus to challenge creditor claims when both financial creditors in CoC were satisfied with each other&#039;s claims. Regarding non-disclosure of leased land status, NCLAT found no lease deed breach as Government of Odisha raised no objections and RP complied with all directions. Court upheld that valuation report sharing with non-CoC members wasn&#039;t mandatory under CIRP regulations. Resolution plan approved with 100% CoC vote share was deemed compliant with IBC provisions. NCLAT reaffirmed limited judicial review scope, emphasizing CoC&#039;s commercial wisdom primacy in resolution plan approval.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770310</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>