LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

TATA STEEL LTD. versus RAJ KUMAR BANERJEE & ORS.

Citation: [2025] 5 S.C.R. 814 · Decided: 07-05-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.B. PARDIWALA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 8 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 5 S.C.R. 814 : 2025 INSC 639
Tata Steel Ltd. 
v. 
Raj Kumar Banerjee & Ors.
(Civil Appeal No. 408 of 2023)
07 May 2025
[J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
(i)	
Whether the additional condonable period of 15 days as 
provided under section 61(2) IBC commences from the end 
of the prescribed limitation period of 30 days, in case the 
prescribed limitation period for filing the appeal falls on a 
day when the court is closed or commences from the day 
when the court reopens?
(ii)	
What is the meaning of the term ‘prescribed period’ as defined 
under Section 2(j) read with Section 4 of the Limitation Act, 
1963 and Rule 3 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016?
(iii)	 Whether the NCLAT has the power to condone the delay 
beyond the said prescribed and condonable period under 
the IBC.
Headnotes†
Limitation Act, 1963 – Sections 2(j) and 4 – Applicability to 
IBC proceedings in light of Section 238A IBC as inserted by 
the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) 
Act, 2018 r/w Rule 3 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016:
Held: The resolution plan of the appellant was approved by 
the NCLT vide order dated 07.04.2022 – Though the Company 
Secretary of the appellant duly informed the listing departments 
of both NSE and BSE about the NCLT order within 30 minutes of 
its pronouncement, the intimation of the said approval was given 
by the BSE and NSE only on 08.04.2022, making the respondent 
aware of it only then – The limitation period for filing the appeal 
commenced on 07.04.2022 and expired on 07.05.2022, a working 
Saturday for the registry of the NCLAT – The appeal, along with 
an application for condonation of delay was e-filed before the 
* Author
[2025] 5 S.C.R. 
815
Tata Steel Ltd. v. Raj Kumar Banerjee & Ors.
NCLAT on 23.05.2022 and physically filed on 24.05.2022 by the 
respondent no.1 herein – The NCLAT condoned the delay vide 
impugned order.
Section 238A IBC makes the Limitation Act, 1963 applicable to 
IBC proceedings – Section 2(j) of Limitation Act defines the terms 
‘period of limitation’ and ‘prescribed period – Section 4 of Limitation 
Act states that when the prescribed period for any suit, appeal or 
application expires on a day when the court is closed, the suit, 
appeal or application may be instituted, preferred or made on the 
day when the court reopens including days wherein it is closed 
during any part of its normal working hours – Rule 3 of the NCLAT 
Rules, 2016 also extends the prescribed period of limitation to the 
next working day when the period ends on a day when the office 
of the Tribunal is closed. [Paras 10, 10.1]
Thus, the benefit of exclusion of period during which Court is 
closed is available only when application for setting aside the 
award is filed within “prescribed period of limitation” and it is not 
available in respect of period extendable by the Court in exercise 
of its discretion [Para 10.2]
IBC, 2016 – Section 61(2) – Computation of limitation period in 
appeals – Limitation period for filing an appeal to the NCLAT 
commences from the date of pronouncement of the order by 
the NCLT – Though Rule 22(2) of the NCLAT Rules mandates 
filing of a certified copy of the impugned order along with 
the appeal, the limitation period is not contingent upon the 
receipt of such a copy:
Held: The total permissible period for filing an appeal under 
Section 61(2) gives a total permissible period 45 days to appeal 
i.e., comprising 30 days as the prescribed period and an additional 
15 days that may be condoned upon showing sufficient cause – In 
V. Nagarajan v. SKS Ispat & Power Ltd., (2022)2 SCC 244 this 
Court held that the Limitation period for filing an appeal to the 
NCLAT commences from the date of pronouncement of the order 
by the NCLT and not from the date when the order is received or 
made available to the aggrieved party – Though Rule 22(2) of the 
NCLAT Rules mandates filing of a certified copy of the impugned 
order along with the appeal, the limitation period is not contingent 
upon the receipt of such a copy – If in case an appellant applies 
for a certified copy, the time taken to obtain it can be excluded 
from the limitation period under section 12(2) of the Limitation 
816
[2025] 5 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Act – The litigant has to file its appeal within thirty days, which 
can be extended up to a period of fifteen days, and no more, 
upon showing sufficient cause – In Sanjay Pandurang Kalate v. 
Vistra ITCL India Ltd. & Others, (2024) 3

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.