<?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>2024 (1) TMI 343 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447944</link>
    <description>Where the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code provides a statutory appeal under Section 62, recourse to Article 136 is inappropriate and cannot be used to bypass the statutory appellate scheme or the bar of limitation. The Supreme Court declined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction, held that delay could not be overlooked for that purpose, and did not entertain the Special Leave Petitions, leaving the parties to pursue remedies available in law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 15:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=739403" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 343 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447944</link>
      <description>Where the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code provides a statutory appeal under Section 62, recourse to Article 136 is inappropriate and cannot be used to bypass the statutory appellate scheme or the bar of limitation. The Supreme Court declined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction, held that delay could not be overlooked for that purpose, and did not entertain the Special Leave Petitions, leaving the parties to pursue remedies available in law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447944</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>