https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95864 A Section 7 application was rejected as time-barred, raising issues whether the claimant was a financial creditor and whether the claim was within limitation. The underlying contract treated the trade advance as converting into a debt carrying time value of money upon default, satisfying the statutory elements of "financial debt"; consequently, the claimant was correctly classified as a financial creditor. On limitation, the exclusion/extension period directed in the SC suo motu proceedings required adding the balance limitation from 15.03.2020 to 01.03.2022, rendering the filing within time; therefore, the rejection on limitation was unsustainable and the appeal was allowed. - NCLAT en-us Fri, 09 Jan 2026 11:23:37 +0530 Fri, 09 Jan 2026 11:23:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95864 A Section 7 application was rejected as time-barred, raising issues whether the claimant was a financial creditor and whether the claim was within limitation. The underlying contract treated the trade advance as converting into a debt carrying time value of money upon default, satisfying the statutory elements of "financial debt"; consequently, the claimant was correctly classified as a financial creditor. On limitation, the exclusion/extension period directed in the SC suo motu proceedings required adding the balance limitation from 15.03.2020 to 01.03.2022, rendering the filing within time; therefore, the rejection on limitation was unsustainable and the appeal was allowed. - NCLAT Highlights IBC Fri, 09 Jan 2026 11:23:37 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95864