https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302596 Delay of 388 days in filing the appeal was condoned in view of the limitation-extension directions issued in suo motu jurisdiction, and the interlocutory application was disposed of accordingly. The appeal challenging approval of the resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, on the ground that provident fund dues were improperly dealt with, was directed to be served on the respondents by e-mail or any available mode and listed for admission. No merits determination was made on the provident fund claim or on the applicability of Section 36 in this order. en-us Tue, 19 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Jun 2022 07:39:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302596 Delay of 388 days in filing the appeal was condoned in view of the limitation-extension directions issued in suo motu jurisdiction, and the interlocutory application was disposed of accordingly. The appeal challenging approval of the resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, on the ground that provident fund dues were improperly dealt with, was directed to be served on the respondents by e-mail or any available mode and listed for admission. No merits determination was made on the provident fund claim or on the applicability of Section 36 in this order. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 19 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302596