https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95261 Issue was whether amendment of a personal guarantor insolvency petition under s.95 IBC to change the date of default by adding a loan recall notice dated 05.04.2016 was permissible, despite objections on limitation and lack of proper invocation of guarantee. The tribunal held that amendment was justified since the creditor could not produce proof of service of an earlier statutory demand, and the added recall notice formed the factual basis to be tested on merits. Allowing amendment did not amount to any finding on limitation or validity of guarantee invocation, which could be urged in reply and decided by the adjudicating authority. Appeal was dismissed. - NCLAT en-us Mon, 22 Dec 2025 07:49:16 +0530 Mon, 22 Dec 2025 07:49:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95261 Issue was whether amendment of a personal guarantor insolvency petition under s.95 IBC to change the date of default by adding a loan recall notice dated 05.04.2016 was permissible, despite objections on limitation and lack of proper invocation of guarantee. The tribunal held that amendment was justified since the creditor could not produce proof of service of an earlier statutory demand, and the added recall notice formed the factual basis to be tested on merits. Allowing amendment did not amount to any finding on limitation or validity of guarantee invocation, which could be urged in reply and decided by the adjudicating authority. Appeal was dismissed. - NCLAT Highlights IBC Mon, 22 Dec 2025 07:49:16 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95261