<?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>2025 (2) TMI 1965 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469309</link>
    <description>The article notes that the Committee of Creditors&#039; overwhelming approval of a 60-day exclusion from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process was treated as an exercise of commercial wisdom, given pending litigation, continued resolution prospects and other CIRP developments. It also states that liquidation is a last resort in insolvency, and that the corporate debtor&#039;s substantial assets and viable resolution possibility weighed against liquidation. The dissent of a small minority financial creditor was considered insufficient to displace the majority view. On that basis, the exclusion was upheld and the request for liquidation was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2026 21:16:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=906918" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 1965 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469309</link>
      <description>The article notes that the Committee of Creditors&#039; overwhelming approval of a 60-day exclusion from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process was treated as an exercise of commercial wisdom, given pending litigation, continued resolution prospects and other CIRP developments. It also states that liquidation is a last resort in insolvency, and that the corporate debtor&#039;s substantial assets and viable resolution possibility weighed against liquidation. The dissent of a small minority financial creditor was considered insufficient to displace the majority view. On that basis, the exclusion was upheld and the request for liquidation was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469309</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>