Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Condonation of an inordinate refiling delay was refused where...
Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan approval.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Condonation of an inordinate refiling delay was refused where the appellant failed to show sufficient cause for curing repeated defects in an appeal against approval of a resolution plan. The NCLAT held that liberal consideration of refiling delay depends on the facts of each case, but the appellant had acted without promptness after repeated defect notifications, and the appeal was filed after approval and implementation of the resolution plan. General explanations of logistical difficulty, bulky papers and holidays were found insufficient, and non-deposit of the requisite fee indicated lack of diligence. The application for condonation was rejected, and the memorandum of appeal was consequently rejected.
Condonation of an inordinate refiling delay was refused where the appellant failed to show sufficient cause for curing repeated defects in an appeal against approval of a resolution plan. The NCLAT held that liberal consideration of refiling delay depends on the facts of each case, but the appellant had acted without promptness after repeated defect notifications, and the appeal was filed after approval and implementation of the resolution plan. General explanations of logistical difficulty, bulky papers and holidays were found insufficient, and non-deposit of the requisite fee indicated lack of diligence. The application for condonation was rejected, and the memorandum of appeal was consequently rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.