Back to feed Read the full judgment
IndiaCivil
The Assistant Commissioner Of Central ... vs Sreenivasa Rao Ravinuthala
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decided
- Oct 14, 2026
- Citation
- 2026 INSC 1121
- Judges
- S.V.N. Bhatti, N.V. Anjaria
AI breakdown
- The tax department appealed a resolution plan late, claiming it was within time based on when they received the order.
- The Supreme Court dismissed their appeal, stating it was filed beyond the 60-day limit allowed under the IBC.
- The court held that the appeal period starts from the decision date, excluding time to get the order, but was still exceeded.
Outcome
The Civil Appeal stands dismissed as barred by limitation.
Taken from the judgment's conclusion. Check the full text for the exact order.
Parties
Applicant
The Assistant Commissioner Of Central ...
Respondent
Sreenivasa Rao Ravinuthala
Judgment text (excerpt)
The Assistant Commissioner Of Central ... vs Sreenivasa Rao Ravinuthala on 14 October, 2026
2026 INSC 1121
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7882 OF 2023
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF
CENTRAL TAX, CGST DIVISION … APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
SREENIVASA RAO RAVINUTHALA
AND ANOTHER … RESPONDENT(S)
JUDGMENT
S.V.N. BHATTI, J.
1. The Civil Appeal arises from the final Judgment and Order dated
02.08.2023, passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
(“NCLAT”), Chennai, in Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 346 of 2021,
under Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“the IBC”).
The Civil Appeal was filed on 21.11.2023. Respondent No. 2 raises a
preliminary objection on limitation.
2. We have heard Mr. Saurav Roy, learned Counsel, for the Appellant, and
Mr. Ritin Rai, learned Senior Counsel, for Respondent No.2 on the preliminary
Signature Not Verified
objection. The following circumstances are noted for appreciating Respondent
Digitally signed by
SNEHA DAS
Date: 2026.10.14
16:48:42 IST
Reason:
No.2's preliminary objection.
1
3. The Corporate Debtor/M/s Samyu Glass Private Limited, a Company
incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, manufactured high-quality
glass containers and was registered as an Export Oriented Unit. Between
2013 and 2017, the Central Excise and Service Tax Department initiated
multiple excise recovery proceedings against the Corporate Debtor. Around
November/December 2016, the Corporate Debtor stopped its manufacturing
activity. The Corporate Debtor subjected the demands raised by the Appellant
to challenge before the Customs, Excise and Service …

Source: Indian Kanoon (indiankanoon.org). Indian court judgments are public records; the summary and translations are AI-generated.