https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763621 The NCLAT Principal Bench dismissed an appeal filed with a 156-day delay in re-filing. The appellant initially e-filed the appeal on 01.06.2023 but refiled it on 22.11.2023. The tribunal found the appellant's explanation insufficient to condone the delay, emphasizing that IBC proceedings are time-bound and adherence to procedural timelines is crucial. Citing Supreme Court precedents including Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel and Ebix Singapore cases, the tribunal held that no indulgence can be given for such long delays without sufficient cause, as it would hinder the resolution process from attaining finality. en-us Mon, 23 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Dec 2024 08:28:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763621 The NCLAT Principal Bench dismissed an appeal filed with a 156-day delay in re-filing. The appellant initially e-filed the appeal on 01.06.2023 but refiled it on 22.11.2023. The tribunal found the appellant's explanation insufficient to condone the delay, emphasizing that IBC proceedings are time-bound and adherence to procedural timelines is crucial. Citing Supreme Court precedents including Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel and Ebix Singapore cases, the tribunal held that no indulgence can be given for such long delays without sufficient cause, as it would hinder the resolution process from attaining finality. Case-Laws IBC Mon, 23 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763621