https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309955 A one-time settlement letter may constitute an acknowledgment of debt under Section 18 of the Limitation Act if it clearly admits the creditor-debtor relationship and a subsisting liability, even without an express promise to pay. On that basis, the Supreme Court treated the 01.06.2016 OTS proposal as sufficient acknowledgment, rejected the objection based on the Evidence Act, and held that Section 23 did not exclude the communication because it was not confidential. Since the proposal fell within three years from the date the account was declared NPA, limitation for the Section 7 insolvency application stood extended, and the application was within time. en-us Tue, 14 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Sep 2023 21:13:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309955 A one-time settlement letter may constitute an acknowledgment of debt under Section 18 of the Limitation Act if it clearly admits the creditor-debtor relationship and a subsisting liability, even without an express promise to pay. On that basis, the Supreme Court treated the 01.06.2016 OTS proposal as sufficient acknowledgment, rejected the objection based on the Evidence Act, and held that Section 23 did not exclude the communication because it was not confidential. Since the proposal fell within three years from the date the account was declared NPA, limitation for the Section 7 insolvency application stood extended, and the application was within time. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 14 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309955