<?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>2026 (1) TMI 271 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784515</link>
    <description>Fees payable to the erstwhile resolution professional were held to constitute CIRP costs under s. 5(13)(a)-(b) IBC, and their payment must follow regs. 34 and 34B of the CIRP Regulations. Reg. 34B(5) mandates that such fees be paid only from specified sources, namely funds available with the corporate debtor, contributions by the applicant or CoC members, or interim finance; accordingly, the AA&#039;s direction on the permissible mode of payment was upheld. In light of the successful resolution applicant depositing the quantified CIRP cost amount with the NCLAT Registrar, the contempt/non-payment grievance was treated as infructuous, and the appeal was disposed of with liberty to move the AA if any grievance survives later.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2026 08:03:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=876415" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 271 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784515</link>
      <description>Fees payable to the erstwhile resolution professional were held to constitute CIRP costs under s. 5(13)(a)-(b) IBC, and their payment must follow regs. 34 and 34B of the CIRP Regulations. Reg. 34B(5) mandates that such fees be paid only from specified sources, namely funds available with the corporate debtor, contributions by the applicant or CoC members, or interim finance; accordingly, the AA&#039;s direction on the permissible mode of payment was upheld. In light of the successful resolution applicant depositing the quantified CIRP cost amount with the NCLAT Registrar, the contempt/non-payment grievance was treated as infructuous, and the appeal was disposed of with liberty to move the AA if any grievance survives later.</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=784515</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>