https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794776 A short delay in filing an appeal beyond the prescribed period under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was condoned because the explanation showed sufficient cause, the delay was within the outer condonable limit, and no deliberate negligence was established. The tribunal also held that closing the corporate debtor's right to file a reply in pending Section 9 proceedings warranted interference, since procedural discipline must yield to natural justice where a meaningful defence is sought, the proposed defence was not shown to be sham or frivolous, and no irreversible prejudice would be caused by granting one final opportunity to reply. en-us Mon, 06 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Jul 2026 08:46:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794776 A short delay in filing an appeal beyond the prescribed period under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was condoned because the explanation showed sufficient cause, the delay was within the outer condonable limit, and no deliberate negligence was established. The tribunal also held that closing the corporate debtor's right to file a reply in pending Section 9 proceedings warranted interference, since procedural discipline must yield to natural justice where a meaningful defence is sought, the proposed defence was not shown to be sham or frivolous, and no irreversible prejudice would be caused by granting one final opportunity to reply. Case-Laws IBC Mon, 06 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794776