Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether 116 days deserved to be excluded from the statutory period for completion of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process and whether the requested extension of time should be granted.
Analysis: The Application was made under Section 12(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 read with Rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016. The record showed that the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process could not be completed within the original timeline because of the COVID-19 lockdown and the resulting inability to complete valuation work and finalize accounts. The Supreme Court's suo motu order extending limitation during the pandemic and Regulation 40C, which excludes lockdown periods from computation of time for tasks that could not be completed due to such lockdown, supported exclusion of the affected period.
Conclusion: The request for exclusion of 116 days from the CIRP timeline was allowed and the period was excluded for completion of the resolution process.