<?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 (3) TMI 762 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788007</link>
    <description>CIRP claim admission requires a creditor to provide documents needed to crystallise its demand within the resolution process. Where the Resolution Professional repeatedly seeks supporting assessment orders and the creditor supplies them only after the committee has approved the resolution plan and the approval application has been filed, non-admission does not establish an irregularity. Distribution under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code waterfall may leave a government operational creditor better off than it would have been if its full claim had been admitted, because admission increases the pool of competing claims. A belatedly crystallised claim alone does not justify setting aside an approved plan.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Mar 2026 10:36:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=890754" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 762 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788007</link>
      <description>CIRP claim admission requires a creditor to provide documents needed to crystallise its demand within the resolution process. Where the Resolution Professional repeatedly seeks supporting assessment orders and the creditor supplies them only after the committee has approved the resolution plan and the approval application has been filed, non-admission does not establish an irregularity. Distribution under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code waterfall may leave a government operational creditor better off than it would have been if its full claim had been admitted, because admission increases the pool of competing claims. A belatedly crystallised claim alone does not justify setting aside an approved plan.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788007</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>