<?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>2025 (3) TMI 1105 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI - LB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767719</link>
    <description>NCLAT Principal Bench dismissed appellant&#039;s application for condonation of 233 days delay in refiling appeal. Though initial appeal was filed within 30-day limitation period, appellant failed to cure defects within mandatory 7-day period under Rule 26 of NCLAT Rules 2016. Registry repeatedly notified same defects but appellant remained callous in addressing them. Appellant&#039;s grounds citing old age and health issues were deemed insufficient and not correlating with reality. NCLAT found no sufficient cause to condone delay, noting appellant could have requested tribunal to proceed with defective appeal if defects were incurable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2025 10:10:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=808525" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1105 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI - LB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767719</link>
      <description>NCLAT Principal Bench dismissed appellant&#039;s application for condonation of 233 days delay in refiling appeal. Though initial appeal was filed within 30-day limitation period, appellant failed to cure defects within mandatory 7-day period under Rule 26 of NCLAT Rules 2016. Registry repeatedly notified same defects but appellant remained callous in addressing them. Appellant&#039;s grounds citing old age and health issues were deemed insufficient and not correlating with reality. NCLAT found no sufficient cause to condone delay, noting appellant could have requested tribunal to proceed with defective appeal if defects were incurable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767719</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>