https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774776 The NCLAT Chennai dismissed an appeal challenging payment of IRP fees and expenses totaling Rs. 9,05,058/-. The appellant argued non-ratification of IRP expenses by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) under Regulation 33(3) of IBBI Regulations, 2016. The tribunal held that ratification occurred when the 2nd CoC meeting approved minutes from the 1st CoC meeting, satisfying regulatory requirements. The court emphasized that ratification, as defined under Section 196 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, provides procedural confirmation of prior decisions and can be expressed through conduct or acts. The tribunal found no anomaly in directing payment to the IRP, upholding the lower authority's decision. en-us Tue, 08 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Jul 2025 08:39:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774776 The NCLAT Chennai dismissed an appeal challenging payment of IRP fees and expenses totaling Rs. 9,05,058/-. The appellant argued non-ratification of IRP expenses by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) under Regulation 33(3) of IBBI Regulations, 2016. The tribunal held that ratification occurred when the 2nd CoC meeting approved minutes from the 1st CoC meeting, satisfying regulatory requirements. The court emphasized that ratification, as defined under Section 196 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, provides procedural confirmation of prior decisions and can be expressed through conduct or acts. The tribunal found no anomaly in directing payment to the IRP, upholding the lower authority's decision. Case-Laws IBC Tue, 08 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774776