<?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 (7) TMI 680 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409838</link>
    <description>Applications under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 are subject to the Limitation Act, 1963 through Section 238A, with Article 137 governing the limitation period. Delay in a Section 9 application must be assessed from the date of default, and condonation is available only on proof of sufficient cause to the Tribunal&#039;s satisfaction. Where the applicant acknowledged filing beyond the three-year period and a substantial delay remained even after excluding lockdown time, the Tribunal found no sufficient cause. The refusal to condone the delay was therefore upheld, and the dismissal of the condonation application was affirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Jul 2021 07:28:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=649941" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (7) TMI 680 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409838</link>
      <description>Applications under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 are subject to the Limitation Act, 1963 through Section 238A, with Article 137 governing the limitation period. Delay in a Section 9 application must be assessed from the date of default, and condonation is available only on proof of sufficient cause to the Tribunal&#039;s satisfaction. Where the applicant acknowledged filing beyond the three-year period and a substantial delay remained even after excluding lockdown time, the Tribunal found no sufficient cause. The refusal to condone the delay was therefore upheld, and the dismissal of the condonation application was affirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409838</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>