<?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 (4) TMI 223 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406107</link>
    <description>Delay in filing an appeal may be condoned where sufficient cause is shown, particularly when limitation is affected by the Supreme Court&#039;s Covid-19 extension and the appellant&#039;s intervening steps to seek intervention and collect records. On that basis, the appeal was treated as within limitation under the proviso to Section 421(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal also stayed the impugned direction restraining governmental or regulatory authorities from taking coercive steps, holding that interim protection was appropriate to avoid prejudice to the appeal without deciding the merits, while proceedings below could continue unaffected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Apr 2021 08:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=641004" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (4) TMI 223 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406107</link>
      <description>Delay in filing an appeal may be condoned where sufficient cause is shown, particularly when limitation is affected by the Supreme Court&#039;s Covid-19 extension and the appellant&#039;s intervening steps to seek intervention and collect records. On that basis, the appeal was treated as within limitation under the proviso to Section 421(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal also stayed the impugned direction restraining governmental or regulatory authorities from taking coercive steps, holding that interim protection was appropriate to avoid prejudice to the appeal without deciding the merits, while proceedings below could continue unaffected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406107</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>