As per case facts, a successful resolution applicant challenged a National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order that condoned a delay in an appeal filed by an erstwhile minority shareholder ... against the resolution plan's approval. The shareholder electronically filed the appeal on the 46th day and physically filed it on the 47th day from the NCLT's order. The NCLAT calculated the limitation period differently, granting the benefit of a holiday to the 30-day period and finding the appeal within the extended 45-day window. The question arose whether the NCLAT possessed the power to condone a delay beyond the maximum 45-day period prescribed under Section 61(2) of the IBC and whether Section 4 of the Limitation Act, 1963 could extend the additional 15-day condonable period. Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that the total permissible period for filing an appeal under Section 61(2) of the IBC is a strict maximum of 45 days (30 days + 15 days), emphasizing the IBC’s object of timely resolution. It clarified that the benefit of Section 4 of the Limitation Act only applies to the initial 30-day "prescribed period" (citing Assam Urban Water Supply), not the discretionary 15-day period. Consequently, the appeal was time-barred, and the NCLAT's order condoning the delay was set aside as being ultra vires its powers.