Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
SC held that Respondent No. 1's appeal was time-barred under Section 61(2) of the IBC. The limitation period commenced on 07.04.2022 and expired on 07.05.2022, with a maximum statutory period of 45 days. The appeal was filed on 24.05.2022, beyond the prescribed and condonable periods. The NCLAT lacks jurisdiction to condone delays beyond the statutorily defined 30+15 days period. The court emphasized the IBC's strict procedural discipline, which mandates adherence to prescribed timelines to ensure efficient resolution of insolvency proceedings. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, reinforcing the tribunal's limited power to extend limitation periods.
SC held that Respondent No. 1's appeal was time-barred under Section 61(2) of the IBC. The limitation period commenced on 07.04.2022 and expired on 07.05.2022, with a maximum statutory period of 45 days. The appeal was filed on 24.05.2022, beyond the prescribed and condonable periods. The NCLAT lacks jurisdiction to condone delays beyond the statutorily defined 30+15 days period. The court emphasized the IBC's strict procedural discipline, which mandates adherence to prescribed timelines to ensure efficient resolution of insolvency proceedings. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, reinforcing the tribunal's limited power to extend limitation periods.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.