<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2021 (1) TMI 1105 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294257</link>
    <description>A Section 7 IBC application must be based on a legally recoverable debt within limitation, and Article 137 of the Limitation Act runs from the date of default. On the facts stated, default occurred on 1 April 1993, or at the latest limitation ran from the recovery certificate dated 27 March 2003, so the insolvency filing was time-barred. The balance sheet dated 16 August 2017 and the letter dated 23 April 2019 were not valid acknowledgments under Section 18 because they did not clearly admit subsisting liability and instead reflected denial of debt. The pendency of DRT recovery proceedings also indicated that IBC could not be used as a recovery mechanism.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2022 18:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=640465" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (1) TMI 1105 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294257</link>
      <description>A Section 7 IBC application must be based on a legally recoverable debt within limitation, and Article 137 of the Limitation Act runs from the date of default. On the facts stated, default occurred on 1 April 1993, or at the latest limitation ran from the recovery certificate dated 27 March 2003, so the insolvency filing was time-barred. The balance sheet dated 16 August 2017 and the letter dated 23 April 2019 were not valid acknowledgments under Section 18 because they did not clearly admit subsisting liability and instead reflected denial of debt. The pendency of DRT recovery proceedings also indicated that IBC could not be used as a recovery mechanism.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294257</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>