https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781736 NCLAT held that the amount disbursed by the appellant NBFC to the corporate debtor constituted "financial debt" under Section 5(8) IBC, as it was a commercial borrowing for time value of money. Alleged breach of RBI guidelines did not negate the character of the transaction as financial debt. Despite absence of a formal written agreement, bank statements, correspondence, and issuance of post-dated cheques established acknowledgment of liability and non-payment. NCLAT found the Adjudicating Authority erred in rejecting the Section 7 application and set aside the order dated 31.03.2022. The appeal was allowed, with the corporate debtor granted three months to discharge the debt with 8% interest and file proof before the Adjudicating Authority. en-us Tue, 14 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Nov 2025 08:42:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781736 NCLAT held that the amount disbursed by the appellant NBFC to the corporate debtor constituted "financial debt" under Section 5(8) IBC, as it was a commercial borrowing for time value of money. Alleged breach of RBI guidelines did not negate the character of the transaction as financial debt. Despite absence of a formal written agreement, bank statements, correspondence, and issuance of post-dated cheques established acknowledgment of liability and non-payment. NCLAT found the Adjudicating Authority erred in rejecting the Section 7 application and set aside the order dated 31.03.2022. The appeal was allowed, with the corporate debtor granted three months to discharge the debt with 8% interest and file proof before the Adjudicating Authority. Case-Laws IBC Tue, 14 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781736