The case involves an appeal by the Commercial Tax Department against Naveen Kumar Sood & Anr. before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). The appeal was delayed, leading to the filing of Interlocutory Applications (IAs) 884 and 942 of 2024 seeking condonation of the delay. IA 884 pertains to a 51-day delay in refiling the appeal, while IA 942 concerns a 14-day delay in filing the appeal. The appellant cited elections in Madhya Pradesh and involvement in election work as reasons for the delay. The respondent contested the validity of the initial filing, arguing it was a 'dummy' filing with only 62 pages, later expanded to 196 pages after refiling.
The Commercial Tax Department filed an appeal against Naveen Kumar Sood & Anr. before the NCLAT. The appeal was filed with a delay of 14 days, and there was a further delay of 51 days in refiling the appeal. The Commercial Tax Department attributed the delay to the involvement of its personnel in election work in Madhya Pradesh. The initial filing of the appeal contained only 62 pages and was later refiled with 196 pages. The respondent argued that the initial filing was a 'dummy' filing and should not be considered a valid filing for the purpose of computing limitation. The respondent relied on judgments of the Delhi High Court to support its argument. The appellant filed an application for condonation of delay, which was contested by the respondent. The court had
…Sign in to view the parties.
The order…
The appeal was…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.
The case involves an appeal by the Commercial Tax Department against Naveen Kumar Sood & Anr. before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). The appeal was delayed, leading to the filing of Interlocutory Applications (IAs) 884 and 942 of 2024 seeking condonation of the delay. IA 884 pertains to a 51-day delay in refiling the appeal, while IA 942 concerns a 14-day delay in filing the appeal. The appellant cited elections in Madhya Pradesh and involvement in election work as reasons for the delay. The respondent contested the validity of the initial filing, arguing it was a 'dummy' filing with only 62 pages, later expanded to 196 pages after refiling.
The Commercial Tax Department filed an appeal against Naveen Kumar Sood & Anr. before the NCLAT. The appeal was filed with a delay of 14 days, and there was a further delay of 51 days in refiling the appeal. The Commercial Tax Department attributed the delay to the involvement of its personnel in election work in Madhya Pradesh. The initial filing of the appeal contained only 62 pages and was later refiled with 196 pages. The respondent argued that the initial filing was a 'dummy' filing and should not be considered a valid filing for the purpose of computing limitation. The respondent relied on judgments of the Delhi High Court to support its argument. The appellant filed an application for condonation of delay, which was contested by the respondent. The court had
…The order…
The appeal was…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.