Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
NCLAT allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order and held that the IA filed by the appellant (corporate debtor) for placing additional documents on record should be permitted. The Tribunal found no abuse of process or intentional delay by the appellant, noting replies were filed within time and no adjournment was sought. Relying on Rule 55, the Tribunal observed that leave to file documents after reply is permissible and that Section 8(2) does not preclude later supplementation of record when pleadings conclude. The matter is remitted to the Adjudicating Authority to adjudicate the admissibility and relevancy of the proffered documents and proceed accordingly.
NCLAT allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order and held that the IA filed by the appellant (corporate debtor) for placing additional documents on record should be permitted. The Tribunal found no abuse of process or intentional delay by the appellant, noting replies were filed within time and no adjournment was sought. Relying on Rule 55, the Tribunal observed that leave to file documents after reply is permissible and that Section 8(2) does not preclude later supplementation of record when pleadings conclude. The matter is remitted to the Adjudicating Authority to adjudicate the admissibility and relevancy of the proffered documents and proceed accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
