Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
NCLAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the NCLT's order dismissing the creditor's application under Section 95 IBC against the personal guarantor as time-barred. It held that the corporate debtor's balance sheets for FY 2016-17 to 2019-20 contained unequivocal acknowledgments of debt, which, by virtue of Section 18 of the Limitation Act and Clauses 12 and 19 of the deed of guarantee, validly extended limitation against the guarantor, whose liability is co-extensive under Section 128 of the Contract Act. The Tribunal further held that the exclusion of limitation from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 made the October 2021 filing within time. It also found the personal guarantee duly invoked through a demand-cum-recall notice issued to both debtor and guarantor.
NCLAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the NCLT's order dismissing the creditor's application under Section 95 IBC against the personal guarantor as time-barred. It held that the corporate debtor's balance sheets for FY 2016-17 to 2019-20 contained unequivocal acknowledgments of debt, which, by virtue of Section 18 of the Limitation Act and Clauses 12 and 19 of the deed of guarantee, validly extended limitation against the guarantor, whose liability is co-extensive under Section 128 of the Contract Act. The Tribunal further held that the exclusion of limitation from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 made the October 2021 filing within time. It also found the personal guarantee duly invoked through a demand-cum-recall notice issued to both debtor and guarantor.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
