TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the delay in re-filing the appeal could be condoned on the showing of sufficient cause.
Analysis: Rule 26 of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016 requires a defective appeal to be re-filed within the prescribed time, and delay in re-filing is not automatic in condonation. The Tribunal applied the governing principle that the applicant must show a reasonable and justifiable explanation for the entire period of default. On the facts, the appeal had repeatedly been re-filed with the same defects unrectified, including defects in the cause title, and the explanation offered did not satisfactorily account for the repeated and prolonged delay.
Conclusion: The delay in re-filing was not condoned and the application for condonation was dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
