https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772659 In a section 7 insolvency proceeding, the tribunal's focus is on whether a due and payable debt and default exist; the challenge to the date of default failed because the record showed repeated defaults, overdue communications, and continuing non-payment before the non-performing asset classification. Limitation was not a bar because balance-sheet entries and auditor references acknowledging outstanding liability constituted written acknowledgements under section 18 of the Limitation Act, extending time from year to year. No breach of natural justice was found, as repeated opportunities had been given and the request to reopen proceedings was rejected by a speaking order. The admission orders initiating CIRP were upheld. en-us Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jun 2025 16:46:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772659 In a section 7 insolvency proceeding, the tribunal's focus is on whether a due and payable debt and default exist; the challenge to the date of default failed because the record showed repeated defaults, overdue communications, and continuing non-payment before the non-performing asset classification. Limitation was not a bar because balance-sheet entries and auditor references acknowledging outstanding liability constituted written acknowledgements under section 18 of the Limitation Act, extending time from year to year. No breach of natural justice was found, as repeated opportunities had been given and the request to reopen proceedings was rejected by a speaking order. The admission orders initiating CIRP were upheld. Case-Laws IBC Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772659