Condonation of Delay: directoral disputes and pending company proceedings can constitute reasonable cause, allowing a belated return to be treated as ...
Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
An appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was found invalidly instituted where it was filed and refiled without the certified copy of the impugned order and without seeking exemption from producing it. The SC held that Rule 22(2) of the NCLAT Rules requires the certified copy to accompany every appeal, and non-compliance goes to the root of institution rather than constituting a curable refiling defect. Because the appellant had not applied for the certified copy within limitation and had shown no diligence, the NCLAT was required first to verify valid institution before considering delay. Its failure to do so vitiated the condonation order, which was set aside.
An appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was found invalidly instituted where it was filed and refiled without the certified copy of the impugned order and without seeking exemption from producing it. The SC held that Rule 22(2) of the NCLAT Rules requires the certified copy to accompany every appeal, and non-compliance goes to the root of institution rather than constituting a curable refiling defect. Because the appellant had not applied for the certified copy within limitation and had shown no diligence, the NCLAT was required first to verify valid institution before considering delay. Its failure to do so vitiated the condonation order, which was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.