Appeal dismissed: Limitation Act doesn't apply to Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code proceedings. Incomplete records claim rejected. The appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal as it found no merit in the arguments raised by the Appellant. The Tribunal held that the claim related ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Appeal dismissed: Limitation Act doesn't apply to Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code proceedings. Incomplete records claim rejected.
The appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal as it found no merit in the arguments raised by the Appellant. The Tribunal held that the claim related to the year 2010 was not barred by limitation as the Limitation Act does not apply to proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Additionally, the contention regarding incomplete records by the Operational Creditor was rejected due to lack of specific pleading and evidence of defects in the application. The appeal was dismissed without costs based on these findings.
Issues: 1. Limitation period for the claim related to the year 2010 under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. 2. Compliance with the requirement of submitting total records by the Operational Creditor under the law.
Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against an order admitting an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The Appellant argued that the claim related to the year 2010 and was barred by limitation. However, the Appellate Tribunal referred to a previous judgment where it was held that the Limitation Act does not apply to proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Therefore, the argument regarding limitation was dismissed based on this precedent.
2. Another contention raised was regarding the total records not being enclosed by the Operational Creditor as required by law. The Appellate Tribunal noted that without specific pleading and in the absence of any defect pointed out to the Adjudicating Authority, such arguments cannot be accepted. It was mentioned that if there were any defects in the application, the Appellant should have pointed them out to enable the Operational Creditor to cure them. Since there was no evidence to suggest that the application was defective, this argument was also rejected.
3. Ultimately, the Appellate Tribunal found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it without imposing any costs. The decision was based on the precedent that the Limitation Act does not apply to proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and the lack of evidence supporting the claim of incomplete records by the Operational Creditor.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
