<?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 (2) TMI 31 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI LB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785836</link>
    <description>Characterisation of debt turned on whether invoice discounting involved disbursement to the corporate debtor; because financers did not make payments to the debtor, the claim was held to be an operational debt under Section 5(21) rather than a financial debt. The subsequent assignment of trade receivables to the claimant did not alter the debt&#039;s fundamental nature, so the Adjudicating Authority correctly rejected the Form C claim as inapposite. The impugned order was affirmed and the appeal dismissed, confirming that creditors cannot be reclassified as financial creditors where the underlying transaction lacks financing to the corporate debtor.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2026 08:20:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=883456" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 31 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI LB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785836</link>
      <description>Characterisation of debt turned on whether invoice discounting involved disbursement to the corporate debtor; because financers did not make payments to the debtor, the claim was held to be an operational debt under Section 5(21) rather than a financial debt. The subsequent assignment of trade receivables to the claimant did not alter the debt&#039;s fundamental nature, so the Adjudicating Authority correctly rejected the Form C claim as inapposite. The impugned order was affirmed and the appeal dismissed, confirming that creditors cannot be reclassified as financial creditors where the underlying transaction lacks financing to the corporate debtor.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785836</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>