<?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 484 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777995</link>
    <description>A suspended director&#039;s attempt to challenge approval of a resolution plan was rejected for lack of locus to reopen settled CIRP proceedings after delayed objections and prior failed challenges. The Tribunal also found no material irregularity in valuation or plan approval: CIRP valuation was conducted by registered valuers, fair and liquidation values were shared with the Committee of Creditors, and earlier or privately obtained valuations could not displace the statutory process. The plan had been approved by a large majority and complied with the Code&#039;s requirements, including eligibility and statutory approval conditions. The approved resolution plan was therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2025 08:38:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=849083" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 484 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777995</link>
      <description>A suspended director&#039;s attempt to challenge approval of a resolution plan was rejected for lack of locus to reopen settled CIRP proceedings after delayed objections and prior failed challenges. The Tribunal also found no material irregularity in valuation or plan approval: CIRP valuation was conducted by registered valuers, fair and liquidation values were shared with the Committee of Creditors, and earlier or privately obtained valuations could not displace the statutory process. The plan had been approved by a large majority and complied with the Code&#039;s requirements, including eligibility and statutory approval conditions. The approved resolution plan was therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777995</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>