<?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 (8) TMI 1301 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI - LB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777113</link>
    <description>Where withdrawal of CIRP is sought after constitution of the committee of creditors, strict compliance with Section 12A is mandatory, including the required approval threshold, and any material misstatement about the stage of proceedings amounts to suppression of material facts. Known homebuyers could not be excluded from participation where their allotment and payment records were already available in the debtor&#039;s records and the claim process was deficient, so they retained locus to challenge the withdrawal. The withdrawal order, having been obtained by fraud and suppression, was liable to recall in exercise of inherent jurisdiction, and the insolvency proceedings were restored for continuation before the Adjudicating Authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:40:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=845590" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 1301 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI - LB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777113</link>
      <description>Where withdrawal of CIRP is sought after constitution of the committee of creditors, strict compliance with Section 12A is mandatory, including the required approval threshold, and any material misstatement about the stage of proceedings amounts to suppression of material facts. Known homebuyers could not be excluded from participation where their allotment and payment records were already available in the debtor&#039;s records and the claim process was deficient, so they retained locus to challenge the withdrawal. The withdrawal order, having been obtained by fraud and suppression, was liable to recall in exercise of inherent jurisdiction, and the insolvency proceedings were restored for continuation before the Adjudicating Authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777113</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>