Condonation of Delay denied: communication lapses and corporate restructuring found insufficient; prolonged inaction and lack of bona fides led to ref...
Export Support intervention INSIGHT launched to provide non financial capacity building, trade intelligence and pilot support with defined funding and...
The NCLAT held that appellants could not later complain of lack of notice or hearing where they were represented by counsel when the interlocutory applications were taken up, since knowledge of the proceedings and an opportunity to object were attributable to them. It further upheld exclusion of 208 days from the personal guarantor insolvency resolution process, ruling that the period spent in earlier appeals could be excluded to give effect to prior appellate directions and that the statutory time limit operates as a moratorium-related provision, not as a bar on exclusion of time for effective continuation of the process. The exclusion was treated as a procedural measure and the appeals were dismissed.
The NCLAT held that appellants could not later complain of lack of notice or hearing where they were represented by counsel when the interlocutory applications were taken up, since knowledge of the proceedings and an opportunity to object were attributable to them. It further upheld exclusion of 208 days from the personal guarantor insolvency resolution process, ruling that the period spent in earlier appeals could be excluded to give effect to prior appellate directions and that the statutory time limit operates as a moratorium-related provision, not as a bar on exclusion of time for effective continuation of the process. The exclusion was treated as a procedural measure and the appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
