<?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 (7) TMI 170 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH: NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794284</link>
    <description>A Resolution Professional is permitted to seek additional documents and clarifications when verifying a claim under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and CIRP Regulations; such verification does not amount to adjudication, and the request for further particulars was upheld. The farmers&#039; compensation claim was not admitted in full because its basis, area-wise computation, attribution to the corporate debtor, and payment date were not sufficiently proved. The higher claim for time extension charges was also reduced, since admission was confined to the amount correctly computed up to the insolvency commencement date and excluded any period beyond that date. The appeal failed and the claim-verification order was affirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2026 08:49:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=909835" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 170 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH: NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794284</link>
      <description>A Resolution Professional is permitted to seek additional documents and clarifications when verifying a claim under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and CIRP Regulations; such verification does not amount to adjudication, and the request for further particulars was upheld. The farmers&#039; compensation claim was not admitted in full because its basis, area-wise computation, attribution to the corporate debtor, and payment date were not sufficiently proved. The higher claim for time extension charges was also reduced, since admission was confined to the amount correctly computed up to the insolvency commencement date and excluded any period beyond that date. The appeal failed and the claim-verification order was affirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794284</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>