https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769489 NCLAT dismissed appeal regarding personal guarantee invocation under Section 95 of IBC. Appellant challenged demand notice sent to different address than specified in guarantee deed and claimed application was time-barred. Tribunal held notice was valid as appellant never denied receiving it, and delivery was proven when subsequent notice was hand-delivered to same address. Limitation period was extended due to corporate debtor's acknowledgment of debt in balance sheets, which constituted written acknowledgment under Section 18. Court ruled guarantee invocation valid despite address discrepancy and application not time-barred due to debt acknowledgment extending limitation period. en-us Tue, 22 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Apr 2025 08:30:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769489 NCLAT dismissed appeal regarding personal guarantee invocation under Section 95 of IBC. Appellant challenged demand notice sent to different address than specified in guarantee deed and claimed application was time-barred. Tribunal held notice was valid as appellant never denied receiving it, and delivery was proven when subsequent notice was hand-delivered to same address. Limitation period was extended due to corporate debtor's acknowledgment of debt in balance sheets, which constituted written acknowledgment under Section 18. Court ruled guarantee invocation valid despite address discrepancy and application not time-barred due to debt acknowledgment extending limitation period. Case-Laws IBC Tue, 22 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769489