Concessional Basic Customs Duty on Ethernet switches: classification as enterprise switches upheld, challenge dismissed for lack of substantial law qu...
Insolvency petition based on admitted debt and default upheld; challenge for malicious initiation rejected, settlement may proceed under resolution fr...
Quashing of FIR and challenge to ECIR over alleged diversion of funds and preferential ESOP pricing dismissed after prima facie money-laundering findi...
Limitation for Section 95 insolvency proceedings against a personal guarantor ran from the date of actual invocation of the guarantee under Article 137 of the Limitation Act. Communications dated 29.01.2016 and 30.11.2018 were held not to be loan recall notices or effective invocations, as they only referred to default and possible legal action. The clear invocation occurred only on 03.08.2020, when the creditor expressly called upon the guarantor to pay. The proceedings initiated thereafter were therefore within limitation, and the NCLAT upheld their admission and dismissed the appeal.
Limitation for Section 95 insolvency proceedings against a personal guarantor ran from the date of actual invocation of the guarantee under Article 137 of the Limitation Act. Communications dated 29.01.2016 and 30.11.2018 were held not to be loan recall notices or effective invocations, as they only referred to default and possible legal action. The clear invocation occurred only on 03.08.2020, when the creditor expressly called upon the guarantor to pay. The proceedings initiated thereafter were therefore within limitation, and the NCLAT upheld their admission and dismissed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.