https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95637 The appellate forum held that the claimant's filing was not barred by limitation because the claims invitation fell within the SC's suo motu excluded period, and the claimant was entitled to that benefit; consequently, rejection on "delay/limitation" was untenable. However, it upheld rejection on merits, finding substantial doubt about the loan document's authenticity due to irregular stamp paper particulars, absence of corporate authorization (e.g., board resolution) for execution, non-production of the original agreement to the resolution professional, and non-reflection of interest in financial statements when the claimant controlled management. The adjudicating authority could invoke inherent powers under Rule 11 to examine genuineness, and the claim was treated as not bona fide; the appeal was dismissed. - NCLAT en-us Fri, 02 Jan 2026 07:51:52 +0530 Fri, 02 Jan 2026 07:51:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95637 The appellate forum held that the claimant's filing was not barred by limitation because the claims invitation fell within the SC's suo motu excluded period, and the claimant was entitled to that benefit; consequently, rejection on "delay/limitation" was untenable. However, it upheld rejection on merits, finding substantial doubt about the loan document's authenticity due to irregular stamp paper particulars, absence of corporate authorization (e.g., board resolution) for execution, non-production of the original agreement to the resolution professional, and non-reflection of interest in financial statements when the claimant controlled management. The adjudicating authority could invoke inherent powers under Rule 11 to examine genuineness, and the claim was treated as not bona fide; the appeal was dismissed. - NCLAT Highlights IBC Fri, 02 Jan 2026 07:51:52 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95637