Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
Insolvency and BankruptcyApril 29, 2024Case LawsAT
Delayed filing of appeal - relevant date for calculation of time limitation - from the date of pronouncement of the Judgment or from the date of uploading of the judgement - The Appellate Tribunal rejected the appeal as it was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation under section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Despite the appellant's contention regarding the delay, the Tribunal found no justification for the delay beyond the prescribed period. Considering the timeline of events, including the date of pronouncement of judgment, uploading of the impugned order, receipt of Free Copy, and application for a Certified Copy, the Tribunal concluded that the appeal was filed beyond the period of limitation prescribed by law. - The NCLAT rejected the appeal.
Delayed filing of appeal - relevant date for calculation of time limitation - from the date of pronouncement of the Judgment or from the date of uploading of the judgement - The Appellate Tribunal rejected the appeal as it was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation under section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Despite the appellant's contention regarding the delay, the Tribunal found no justification for the delay beyond the prescribed period. Considering the timeline of events, including the date of pronouncement of judgment, uploading of the impugned order, receipt of Free Copy, and application for a Certified Copy, the Tribunal concluded that the appeal was filed beyond the period of limitation prescribed by law. - The NCLAT rejected the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
