<?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>2023 (7) TMI 484 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440211</link>
    <description>Pending SICA proceedings and the post-abatement period were relevant to limitation, because the suspended time was excluded under Section 22(5) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, and the Section 7 insolvency application had to be tested from the post-abatement date. The corporate debtor&#039;s balance sheets, read with auditor&#039;s and directors&#039; reports, could amount to acknowledgment of liability under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 where they reflected subsisting borrowings and no clear, continuous repudiation. Settlement letters and related payment-linked communications also operated as acknowledgments. On that basis, the limitation objection was rejected and the matter was remitted for decision on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Jul 2023 13:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=719368" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 484 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440211</link>
      <description>Pending SICA proceedings and the post-abatement period were relevant to limitation, because the suspended time was excluded under Section 22(5) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, and the Section 7 insolvency application had to be tested from the post-abatement date. The corporate debtor&#039;s balance sheets, read with auditor&#039;s and directors&#039; reports, could amount to acknowledgment of liability under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 where they reflected subsisting borrowings and no clear, continuous repudiation. Settlement letters and related payment-linked communications also operated as acknowledgments. On that basis, the limitation objection was rejected and the matter was remitted for decision on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440211</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>