<?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 24 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785829</link>
    <description>Adjudicative review addressed whether claimed high-rate interest formed part of financial debt; tribunal found interest excessive and not admissible where loans were related-party advances lacking board resolutions, charge registration, loan documentation, and accounting recognition, and ordered disallowance of the interest. On secured status, failure to register the charge and absence of documentation meant the creditor was not treated as secured; consequence: interest and secured claim treatment rejected. Appeal against the disallowance was dismissed for lack of bona fides and evidentiary support.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2026 08:20:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=883463" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 24 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785829</link>
      <description>Adjudicative review addressed whether claimed high-rate interest formed part of financial debt; tribunal found interest excessive and not admissible where loans were related-party advances lacking board resolutions, charge registration, loan documentation, and accounting recognition, and ordered disallowance of the interest. On secured status, failure to register the charge and absence of documentation meant the creditor was not treated as secured; consequence: interest and secured claim treatment rejected. Appeal against the disallowance was dismissed for lack of bona fides and evidentiary support.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785829</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>