https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274359 The appeal was found to have been filed within time because the order was made available to the appellant and the appeal was preferred within the relevant period, so the Registry objection on delay failed on the facts. On limitation, the Tribunal reiterated that initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process under Sections 7, 9 and 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 could not be rejected as time-barred where the right to apply accrued only on commencement of the Code on 1 December 2016. It noted that limitation principles and laches may still be considered, but the Section 9 application was not barred by limitation and the impugned rejection was unsustainable. en-us Wed, 15 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Aug 2018 21:49:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274359 The appeal was found to have been filed within time because the order was made available to the appellant and the appeal was preferred within the relevant period, so the Registry objection on delay failed on the facts. On limitation, the Tribunal reiterated that initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process under Sections 7, 9 and 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 could not be rejected as time-barred where the right to apply accrued only on commencement of the Code on 1 December 2016. It noted that limitation principles and laches may still be considered, but the Section 9 application was not barred by limitation and the impugned rejection was unsustainable. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 15 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274359