<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2021 (2) TMI 1147 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404655</link>
    <description>The Tribunal concluded that the application under Section 9 of the IBC was time-barred, as the filing exceeded the limitation period. The time spent on the winding-up petition could not be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, and the delay due to the authorized signatory&#039;s illness was not sufficiently justified for condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2021 13:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=637625" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (2) TMI 1147 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404655</link>
      <description>The Tribunal concluded that the application under Section 9 of the IBC was time-barred, as the filing exceeded the limitation period. The time spent on the winding-up petition could not be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, and the delay due to the authorized signatory&#039;s illness was not sufficiently justified for condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404655</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>