https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782918 NCLAT held that the application under s.95 of the IBC against the personal guarantor was within limitation, applying the exclusion of the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 in light of binding SC precedent on limitation during the COVID-19 pandemic. It concluded that the adjudicating authority had erroneously treated the debt as time-barred and rejected the petition. Both impugned orders were set aside. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority with a direction to admit the CIRP in respect of the personal guarantor and to proceed further strictly in accordance with law. The appeal was allowed by way of remand. en-us Thu, 11 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Dec 2025 08:46:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782918 NCLAT held that the application under s.95 of the IBC against the personal guarantor was within limitation, applying the exclusion of the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 in light of binding SC precedent on limitation during the COVID-19 pandemic. It concluded that the adjudicating authority had erroneously treated the debt as time-barred and rejected the petition. Both impugned orders were set aside. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority with a direction to admit the CIRP in respect of the personal guarantor and to proceed further strictly in accordance with law. The appeal was allowed by way of remand. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 11 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782918