<?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>2024 (9) TMI 1912 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467968</link>
    <description>Claims in liquidation must be submitted and proved with reference to the liquidation commencement date under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the Liquidation Process Regulations. Claims filed after the public-announcement deadline, or claims that arise only after liquidation commences, cannot ordinarily be admitted because Regulation 16 requires proof of debt as on the liquidation commencement date. Regulation 28 is a limited exception for debt payable at a future time, but it does not extend to a claim that did not exist when liquidation began. A later arbitral award did not change that position, so the liquidator was justified in rejecting the claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 20:17:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=896249" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 1912 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467968</link>
      <description>Claims in liquidation must be submitted and proved with reference to the liquidation commencement date under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the Liquidation Process Regulations. Claims filed after the public-announcement deadline, or claims that arise only after liquidation commences, cannot ordinarily be admitted because Regulation 16 requires proof of debt as on the liquidation commencement date. Regulation 28 is a limited exception for debt payable at a future time, but it does not extend to a claim that did not exist when liquidation began. A later arbitral award did not change that position, so the liquidator was justified in rejecting the claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467968</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>