https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91614 The NCLAT dismissed the appeals for failure to condone delays of 240 and 190 days in refiling, holding that the applicants did not demonstrate sufficient cause or due diligence in curing repeated minor defects. The tribunal emphasized the necessity of balancing leniency with the strict timelines mandated by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Grounds such as the birth of a clerk's child and office relocation with misplaced files were found to be unmeritorious and indicative of negligence rather than circumstances beyond control. The repetitive nature of defects and the protracted delay in rectifying them reflected a lack of earnest effort. Allowing such delays without adequate justification would undermine the time-bound insolvency resolution process. Consequently, the tribunal refused condonation of delay and dismissed the appeals. en-us Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:11:04 +0530 Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:11:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91614 The NCLAT dismissed the appeals for failure to condone delays of 240 and 190 days in refiling, holding that the applicants did not demonstrate sufficient cause or due diligence in curing repeated minor defects. The tribunal emphasized the necessity of balancing leniency with the strict timelines mandated by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Grounds such as the birth of a clerk's child and office relocation with misplaced files were found to be unmeritorious and indicative of negligence rather than circumstances beyond control. The repetitive nature of defects and the protracted delay in rectifying them reflected a lack of earnest effort. Allowing such delays without adequate justification would undermine the time-bound insolvency resolution process. Consequently, the tribunal refused condonation of delay and dismissed the appeals. Highlights IBC Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:11:04 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91614