TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 1081X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when Respondent No. 1 filed reply to the notice dated 23.9.2019 on the online portal of Income Tax Department informing Appellant of the approval of the Resolution Plan, the maximum prescribed 45 days period of limitation would expire on 2.12.2019. After excluding 11 days period that was spent in obtaining certified copy of the order, the limitation would expire on 13.12.2019. Even then the limitation appeal filed on 27.12.2019 is time barred. The Appellant was adequately informed and well aware of the initiation of CIRP and approval of the Resolution Plan and yet he did not file any claim with the Resolution Professional. The Learned Counsel for Applicant of IA No. 909 of 2020) has, therefore, emphatically stated that since the Appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the impugned order. I.A. No. 102 of 2020 stands disposed of. Learned Counsel for the Appellant prays for and is allowed to implead Jyoti Stips Ltd. (Successful Resolution Applicant) as 2ndRespondent. Necessary corrections be made in the cause title of the appeal and other relevant pages of the paper-books by 9th January, 2020. Additionally, by order dated 8.1.2020 the Successful Resolution Applicant (Jyoti Stips Ltd.) was also permitted to be impleaded as Respondent No. 2 at the request of the Learned Counsel for Appellant. Thereafter notice was directed to be issued to the Respondents and the appeal was listed for hearing on admission (after notice). In response, Respondent No. 1 filed I.A. No. 909 of 2020 raising the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing approval of the Adjudicating Authority to the Resolution Plan to the Assistant Commissioner, Income Tax Department (attached at pp. 159-160 and typed copies at pp. 159A-160A of IA No. 909 of 2020). (iv) Again on 18.10.2019, Respondent No. 1 filed reply to the notice dated 23.9.2019 on the online portal of Income Tax Department, informing Appellant of the approval of the Resolution Plan on 6.6.2019 (copy attached at pp.167-170 of IA No. 909 of 2020). Thus on 18.10.2019, Appellant was again made aware of the order dated 6.6.2019 and a copy of the said order was also conveyed to the Appellant. (v) In para 4 of the appeal filed by the Appellant seeking condonation of delay, Appellant has said that he applied for certified copy of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there is no provision for review in NCLAT Rules, 2016, and the power vested under Rule 11 can only be exercised to further the cause of justice, or prevent abuse of process. 6. The Learned Counsel for Appellant has cited the observations made by Hon ble NCLAT in the case of Adish Jain s/o Mohinder Jain (Shareholder of Corporate Debtor) Vs. Sumit Bansal (IRP of Corporate Debtor] (Supra), wherein the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Lily Thomas and Ors. Vs. Union of India Ors. [(2006) 6 SCC 224] has been cited, which is as under:- 56. It follows, therefore, that the power of review can be exercised for correction of a mistake but not to substitute a view. Such powers can be exercised within the limits o the statute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ithin the time limit of 45 days as required in law. Hence, the appeal is well within limitation. 8. We note that this Tribunal passed order on 8.1.2020 based on the arguments and statements put forth only by the Learned Counsel for Appellant. We also note that later, after issue of notice to Respondent No.1, certain other facts were placed before this Tribunal regarding the prior knowledge of the Impugned Order to the Appellant. All these instances have been stated by the Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1/Applicant in IA No. 909 of 2020 (supra). These contentions which are based on various documents and records referred to and cited by the Learned Counsel for the Applicant have not been converted or disputed by the Learned Counsel for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for Applicant of IA No. 909 of 2020) has, therefore, emphatically stated that since the Appellant was well aware of the initiation of CIRP much before 9.12.2019, when he applied for obtaining certified copy of the Impugned Order, therefore, the appeal is barred by limitation of time. 13. We are of the clear view that, since new facts have come to light through I.A. No. 909 of 2020 filed by the Respondent No. 1 in the Appeal, which were not brought to this Tribunal s notice/knowledge on 8.1.2020, they should now be considered in the interest of justice. 14. In the light of the aforementioned discussion, I.A No. 909 of 2020 succeeds and the prayers made therein are granted. As a result, Company Appeal (AT)(Ins) No. 35 of 2020 is held to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
