https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756507 The NCLAT dismissed an appeal challenging the condonation of 86 days delay in re-filing. The tribunal held that when an appeal is e-filed within the 30-day limitation period but contains defects, the original filing date determines limitation, not the re-filing date after curing defects. The appeal was initially e-filed on 25.09.2023 within 30 days of the impugned order dated 28.08.2023, making it timely. The tribunal distinguished between filing date and re-filing date, ruling that non-compliance with certified copy requirements doesn't automatically bar appeals when sufficient cause exists for delay condonation. en-us Wed, 24 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Aug 2024 16:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756507 The NCLAT dismissed an appeal challenging the condonation of 86 days delay in re-filing. The tribunal held that when an appeal is e-filed within the 30-day limitation period but contains defects, the original filing date determines limitation, not the re-filing date after curing defects. The appeal was initially e-filed on 25.09.2023 within 30 days of the impugned order dated 28.08.2023, making it timely. The tribunal distinguished between filing date and re-filing date, ruling that non-compliance with certified copy requirements doesn't automatically bar appeals when sufficient cause exists for delay condonation. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 24 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756507