https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397596 In CIRP, inadvertent non-communication of the tribunal's appointment order to the insolvency resolution professional or corporate debtor can justify exclusion of the intervening period where the lapse is attributable to the registry and not the parties. The adjudicating authority may grant such relief in extraordinary circumstances to prevent the resolution process from being defeated by a procedural omission, applying the principle that an act of the court should prejudice no one. The exclusion of time was therefore upheld, and the challenge to the order failed. en-us Mon, 10 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Aug 2020 11:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397596 In CIRP, inadvertent non-communication of the tribunal's appointment order to the insolvency resolution professional or corporate debtor can justify exclusion of the intervening period where the lapse is attributable to the registry and not the parties. The adjudicating authority may grant such relief in extraordinary circumstances to prevent the resolution process from being defeated by a procedural omission, applying the principle that an act of the court should prejudice no one. The exclusion of time was therefore upheld, and the challenge to the order failed. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 10 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397596