<?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 (9) TMI 70 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777581</link>
    <description>For admission of a Section 7 insolvency application, proof of financial debt and default remained the ative requirement, and the challenge to NPA classification did not displace that showing. The record included overdue loan accounts, bank statements, recall and SARFAESI notices, restructuring requests and OTS proposals, all supporting continuing non-payment and acknowledgment of liability. The RBI circular cited by the appellant was treated as prospective and not as negating an established default. On limitation, repeated restructuring requests and later conduct were treated as acknowledgments of liability, and the application was found maintainable and within time. The admission order was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2025 08:01:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=847376" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 70 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777581</link>
      <description>For admission of a Section 7 insolvency application, proof of financial debt and default remained the ative requirement, and the challenge to NPA classification did not displace that showing. The record included overdue loan accounts, bank statements, recall and SARFAESI notices, restructuring requests and OTS proposals, all supporting continuing non-payment and acknowledgment of liability. The RBI circular cited by the appellant was treated as prospective and not as negating an established default. On limitation, repeated restructuring requests and later conduct were treated as acknowledgments of liability, and the application was found maintainable and within time. The admission order was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777581</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>