<?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>2023 (12) TMI 1073 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447389</link>
    <description>The NCLAT dismissed an appeal seeking condonation of 15-day delay in filing. The appellant, holding 85% voting share in Committee of Creditors, was aware of the impugned order on 10.08.2023 but waited for liquidation application outcome before filing appeal. The tribunal rejected appellant&#039;s justification that it requested a third party to obtain certified copy, noting NCLAT Rules permit direct application with requisite fee. Citing Supreme Court precedent, the tribunal held that discretionary waiver of procedural requirements doesn&#039;t create automatic exception for parties making no timely efforts. The appellant&#039;s failure to apply for certified copy within statutory limitation period under Section 61(3) of the Code rendered the appeal time-barred, with insufficient cause shown for delay.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Dec 2023 15:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=736608" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (12) TMI 1073 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447389</link>
      <description>The NCLAT dismissed an appeal seeking condonation of 15-day delay in filing. The appellant, holding 85% voting share in Committee of Creditors, was aware of the impugned order on 10.08.2023 but waited for liquidation application outcome before filing appeal. The tribunal rejected appellant&#039;s justification that it requested a third party to obtain certified copy, noting NCLAT Rules permit direct application with requisite fee. Citing Supreme Court precedent, the tribunal held that discretionary waiver of procedural requirements doesn&#039;t create automatic exception for parties making no timely efforts. The appellant&#039;s failure to apply for certified copy within statutory limitation period under Section 61(3) of the Code rendered the appeal time-barred, with insufficient cause shown for delay.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447389</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>