https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95948 The dominant issue was maintainability of the appeal under s.61(2) of the IBC. The tribunal held that the appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period and, in the absence of any application or sufficient cause for delay, it could not be entertained, resulting in dismissal as time-barred. On the attempted challenge to differential distribution between assenting and dissenting/abstaining secured financial creditors, the tribunal found the plea of "discrimination" was in substance a belated, indirect challenge to an already-approved resolution plan, which had attained finality and could not be reopened or modified after implementation, resulting in denial of any relief. - NCLAT en-us Mon, 12 Jan 2026 16:45:38 +0530 Mon, 12 Jan 2026 16:45:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95948 The dominant issue was maintainability of the appeal under s.61(2) of the IBC. The tribunal held that the appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period and, in the absence of any application or sufficient cause for delay, it could not be entertained, resulting in dismissal as time-barred. On the attempted challenge to differential distribution between assenting and dissenting/abstaining secured financial creditors, the tribunal found the plea of "discrimination" was in substance a belated, indirect challenge to an already-approved resolution plan, which had attained finality and could not be reopened or modified after implementation, resulting in denial of any relief. - NCLAT Highlights IBC Mon, 12 Jan 2026 16:45:38 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95948