<?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>Corporate veil lifting binds project land and allottee claims to restored resolution plans, barring parallel insolvency processes.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104646</link>
    <description>Corporate veil lifting for real estate project resolution treated the developer and the land-owning special purpose company as a single economic entity, bringing the leasehold land within the restored resolution plan. Allottee claims arising from the same project were addressed through completion and delivery under that plan, leaving no independently due debt to support a separate insolvency process. A parallel CIRP over the project land would impose a moratorium and vest management in an insolvency professional, obstructing implementation of the restored plan. The Monitoring Committee responsible for plan implementation had standing as an aggrieved person, and binding Supreme Court precedent required consideration. Allottees&#039; remedy lay in enforcing the restored plan.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 08:45:20 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 08:45:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=928515" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Corporate veil lifting binds project land and allottee claims to restored resolution plans, barring parallel insolvency processes.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104646</link>
      <description>Corporate veil lifting for real estate project resolution treated the developer and the land-owning special purpose company as a single economic entity, bringing the leasehold land within the restored resolution plan. Allottee claims arising from the same project were addressed through completion and delivery under that plan, leaving no independently due debt to support a separate insolvency process. A parallel CIRP over the project land would impose a moratorium and vest management in an insolvency professional, obstructing implementation of the restored plan. The Monitoring Committee responsible for plan implementation had standing as an aggrieved person, and binding Supreme Court precedent required consideration. Allottees&#039; remedy lay in enforcing the restored plan.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 08:45:20 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104646</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>