https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98800 Delay in re-filing a company appeal was not condoned because the appellant failed to show sufficient cause or due diligence in curing defects. The NCLAT held that, especially in insolvency matters, re-filing delays must be assessed strictly in light of the Code's time-bound framework, and generic explanations such as re-pagination, paper-book restructuring, rescanning, and internal record retrieval are inadequate without material particulars. Here, no defect sheet, specific Registry objections, or date-wise chronology of corrective steps was produced, and the claim that records were in Mumbai was treated as a bare logistical inconvenience. The application for condonation was rejected, and the appeal was consequently rejected. en-us Wed, 15 Apr 2026 09:05:03 +0530 Wed, 15 Apr 2026 09:05:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98800 Delay in re-filing a company appeal was not condoned because the appellant failed to show sufficient cause or due diligence in curing defects. The NCLAT held that, especially in insolvency matters, re-filing delays must be assessed strictly in light of the Code's time-bound framework, and generic explanations such as re-pagination, paper-book restructuring, rescanning, and internal record retrieval are inadequate without material particulars. Here, no defect sheet, specific Registry objections, or date-wise chronology of corrective steps was produced, and the claim that records were in Mumbai was treated as a bare logistical inconvenience. The application for condonation was rejected, and the appeal was consequently rejected. Highlights IBC Wed, 15 Apr 2026 09:05:03 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98800