Jurisdiction to condone delay in bank guarantee compliance cannot be expanded beyond statutory authority, with merits dismissal set aside.

An application seeking condonation of delay in furnishing performance and unconditional financial bank guarantees could not be dismissed on merits after the adjudicating authority itself held that it had no jurisdiction to grant such condonation. The authority noted that no provision empowered it to enlarge its jurisdiction or take over a matter left to the Committee of Creditors' discretion. The appellate tribunal therefore set aside the merits-based dismissal to that extent, deleted the impugned paragraph, and directed that the application stand disposed of in light of the jurisdictional finding.

---

---

Issues: Whether the application seeking condonation of delay in furnishing the performance bank guarantee and the unconditional financial bank guarantee could be dismissed on merits when the adjudicating authority itself found no jurisdiction to grant such condonation.

Analysis: The adjudicating authority had observed that there was no provision of law empowering it to condone the delay in furnishing the bank guarantees and that it could not expand its jurisdiction or step into a matter left to the discretion of the Committee of Creditors. In that view, the application ought to have been disposed of in light of that jurisdictional observation, rather than being rejected on merits.

Conclusion: The dismissal on merits was set aside to that extent, the impugned paragraph was deleted, and the application was directed to stand disposed of.

---