<?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>Appeal Rejected; Resolution Plan Under Section 30(2)(b) IBC Upheld, CoC&#039;s 100% Commercial Wisdom Given Full Primacy</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94479</link>
    <description>NCLAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the NCLT&#039;s order approving the resolution plan for the corporate debtor. It held that, although the appellant&#039;s expenditure on the corporate debtor had been acknowledged in prior proceedings, the appellant failed to substantiate its claim as financial or operational debt under the IBC, particularly given the delayed filing, absence of supporting documents, and an exorbitant, contractually unsupported interest component. NCLAT found no contravention of s.30(2)(b) IBC or the CIRP Regulations and reiterated the primacy of the CoC&#039;s commercial wisdom, especially where the plan had been approved with 100% voting share. As the resolution plan complied with all mandatory statutory requirements and no materia.....</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 08:55:41 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 08:55:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=867020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Appeal Rejected; Resolution Plan Under Section 30(2)(b) IBC Upheld, CoC&#039;s 100% Commercial Wisdom Given Full Primacy</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94479</link>
      <description>NCLAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the NCLT&#039;s order approving the resolution plan for the corporate debtor. It held that, although the appellant&#039;s expenditure on the corporate debtor had been acknowledged in prior proceedings, the appellant failed to substantiate its claim as financial or operational debt under the IBC, particularly given the delayed filing, absence of supporting documents, and an exorbitant, contractually unsupported interest component. NCLAT found no contravention of s.30(2)(b) IBC or the CIRP Regulations and reiterated the primacy of the CoC&#039;s commercial wisdom, especially where the plan had been approved with 100% voting share. As the resolution plan complied with all mandatory statutory requirements and no materia.....</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 08:55:41 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94479</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>