Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was barred by limitation and whether the pendency of recovery and execution proceedings preserved the right to initiate CIRP.
Analysis: The Corporate Debtor's account had been classified as NPA long before the filing of the Section 7 application. The financial debt had been assigned to the appellant after the default had already occurred, and recovery proceedings had commenced years earlier, culminating in a recovery certificate that remained under execution. Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 governs applications under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and the three-year period had expired well before the application was filed. The existence of continuing recovery and execution proceedings did not permit use of the insolvency process as a recovery mechanism.
Conclusion: The Section 7 application was barred by limitation and initiation of CIRP was not maintainable. The issue was decided against the appellant.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed, and the dismissal left the appellant free to continue the execution and recovery proceedings already pending before the competent forum.
Ratio Decidendi: An application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 must be filed within the limitation period prescribed by Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and pending recovery or execution proceedings do not extend that period or convert insolvency into a recovery remedy.