https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92030 NCLAT dismissed the appeal and upheld rejection of the Section 9 petition as time-barred. The Tribunal found the date of default established and the petition filed beyond the three-year limitation; there was no pleading or documentary acknowledgment by the Corporate Debtor sufficient to invoke extension under Section 19 of the Limitation Act. Refund of a security deposit was held not to constitute acknowledgment of debt, and the Operational Creditor did not demonstrate payment within the prescribed period or written admission by the payer. In consequence, the essential conditions for condoning delay were not satisfied and the Section 9 application could not be entertained. en-us Fri, 29 Aug 2025 08:56:29 +0530 Fri, 29 Aug 2025 08:56:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92030 NCLAT dismissed the appeal and upheld rejection of the Section 9 petition as time-barred. The Tribunal found the date of default established and the petition filed beyond the three-year limitation; there was no pleading or documentary acknowledgment by the Corporate Debtor sufficient to invoke extension under Section 19 of the Limitation Act. Refund of a security deposit was held not to constitute acknowledgment of debt, and the Operational Creditor did not demonstrate payment within the prescribed period or written admission by the payer. In consequence, the essential conditions for condoning delay were not satisfied and the Section 9 application could not be entertained. Highlights IBC Fri, 29 Aug 2025 08:56:29 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92030