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: (i) Whether the applicant trust had locus and authority to maintain the application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. (ii) Whether the application was barred by limitation.
Issue (i): Whether the applicant trust had locus and authority to maintain the application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Analysis: The applicant was held to be a trust constituted by the Central Government for acquisition of stressed assets of IDBI and notified as a financial institution. The challenge to its competence and to the authorisation of the signatory was rejected. The transfer of stressed assets to the applicant was treated as valid.
Conclusion: The issue was answered in favour of the applicant.
Issue (ii): Whether the application was barred by limitation.
Analysis: The record did not show acknowledgements extending limitation for the relevant period, and the debt would otherwise have been time-barred. However, the Debt Recovery Tribunal had already passed an order in favour of the applicant before admission of the insolvency case, and that order was treated as supporting the subsistence of the enforceable debt for admission under section 7.
Conclusion: The issue was answered in favour of the applicant and the plea of limitation failed.
Final Conclusion: The section 7 application was admitted, moratorium was ordered, and an interim resolution professional was appointed, thereby commencing corporate insolvency resolution against the corporate debtor.
Ratio Decidendi: A duly notified government-created asset-reconstruction trust can maintain a section 7 application as a financial institution, and admission may follow where debt and default are established and the enforceability of the claim is supported by the existing adjudicatory order notwithstanding the limitation objection.