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, under section 421(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, the Appellate Tribunal could condone delay beyond the further period of forty-five days by invoking section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Analysis: Section 421(3) prescribes a limitation period of forty-five days for filing the appeal and permits the Appellate Tribunal to entertain it only within a further period not exceeding forty-five days if sufficient cause is shown. The provision is therefore a special limitation scheme with an outer limit. Section 433, which applies the Limitation Act only "as far as may be", cannot override that special scheme. The mandatory language of the proviso shows that the additional forty-five days is a peremptory grace period and not an open-ended power of condonation. Authorities dealing with different statutory settings, including provisions using the expression "so far as may be" or cases where no express outer limit exists, were distinguished.
Conclusion: Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to enlarge the period beyond the further forty-five days under section 421(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The appeal was time-barred and could not be entertained.
Final Conclusion: The special limitation regime under the Companies Act excluded any further condonation of delay beyond the statutorily fixed outer limit, so the appellate challenge failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a special statute prescribes a fixed limitation period and an additional condonable period by mandatory language fixing an outer limit, section 5 of the Limitation Act is excluded and no further condonation can be granted beyond that outer limit.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
