<?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 1610 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779121</link>
    <description>SC dismissed the appeals, upholding approval and implementation framework of the resolution process. Court found appellants (erstwhile promoters) acted to delay CIRP and frivilously sought the plan, noting NCLT costs against them; their locus was not fatal and merits were adjudicated. SC held the CoC continues until plan implementation or liquidation, rejected challenges to CCDs/equity characterization, and found implementation delays were due to criminal and investigative proceedings beyond the resolution applicant&#039;s control. Payments for pre-CIRP dues without CoC approval were improper. No substantial question of law arose; appeals dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2025 08:27:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=855173" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 1610 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779121</link>
      <description>SC dismissed the appeals, upholding approval and implementation framework of the resolution process. Court found appellants (erstwhile promoters) acted to delay CIRP and frivilously sought the plan, noting NCLT costs against them; their locus was not fatal and merits were adjudicated. SC held the CoC continues until plan implementation or liquidation, rejected challenges to CCDs/equity characterization, and found implementation delays were due to criminal and investigative proceedings beyond the resolution applicant&#039;s control. Payments for pre-CIRP dues without CoC approval were improper. No substantial question of law arose; appeals dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779121</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>