National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
Commissioner of Central Excise and Central Tax VS Mr. Manish Agrawal Resolution professional of M/s. Magnifico Minerals Private Limited on 4 November 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Interlocutory Application No.7973/2026 Un-numbered Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.___/2026 (F.No.31.07.2026/NCLAT/UR/07824) In the matter of: Commissioner of Central Excise and Central Tax .…. Appellant Vs. Manish Agrawal Resolution Professional of Magnifico Minerals Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. .….Respondentss Appearance: Anurag Ojha, SSC with Dipak Raj, Advocate, for the Appellant. 4 th November, 2026
(Hybrid Mode) This is an application to extend the time granted for curing the defects. The facts giving rise to present IA (re-filing) are that the Appellant e-filed the Memo of Appeal on 20.07.2026. The Office after scrutiny of the Memo of Appeal on 31.07.2026, intimated the defects to the Appellant on the same day. The Appellant re-filed the Appeal on 14.09.2026. It is stated in the IA that after marking of defects, certain documents were reviewed by the office of the counsel and it was seen that the fair/typed copies of the documents are needed in order to assist the Hon’ble tribunal properly. Clear copies of the documents were asked from the department, however, those were the only copies which were in possession of the department, it was decided that typed copies be made by the office of the counsel. Upon refiling same defects were marked again. The Counsel handling the matter was down with Typhoid . Hence, there is delay of 50 days in refiling the Memo of Appeal, so the same may be condoned. Heard Ld. Counsel appearing for the Appellant and perused the averments made in the IA as well as Office report. The Appellant was required to re-file the Memo of Appeal within seven days from the date of intimation of the defects. However, the Appellant re-filed the Memo of Appeal with a delay of 38 days, hence, the case be placed before the Hon’ble Bench with defect for appropriate orders. List the case before the Hon’ble Bench under the heading ‘for admission with defect (fresh case)’. (Raj Kumar) Registrar