<?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>Exclusion of 60 days from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process was supported by the Committee of Creditors&#039; overwhelming majority after considering pending litigation, potential receipt and evaluation of a resolution plan, and other CIRP developments. The Tribunal treated that decision as commercial wisdom and declined to displace it at the request of a dissenting minority financial creditor. Liquidation, being a last resort under the insolvency framework, was not warranted because the corporate debtor retained substantial assets and viable resolution prospects. The time exclusion was upheld and liquidation was declined.</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>Exclusion of 60 days from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process was supported by the Committee of Creditors&#039; overwhelming majority after considering pending litigation, potential receipt and evaluation of a resolution plan, and other CIRP developments. The Tribunal treated that decision as commercial wisdom and declined to displace it at the request of a dissenting minority financial creditor. Liquidation, being a last resort under the insolvency framework, was not warranted because the corporate debtor retained substantial assets and viable resolution prospects. The time exclusion was upheld and liquidation was declined.</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>