https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784772 An application under IBC s.9 based on alleged operational debt was held time-barred because any acknowledgement after expiry of the three-year limitation does not extend limitation, and a journal entry transferring earlier Jamnagar-unit liabilities to another unit merely shifted book entries without creating a fresh cause of action; accordingly, invoices already beyond three years could not be enforced in insolvency and the threshold was not met. A signed ledger/balance confirmation was found ambiguous and lacking any clear promise to pay, so it did not attract Contract Act s.25(3) to create a fresh contractual obligation; the debt therefore remained time-barred. Interest was disallowed as invoices contained no interest terms and the computation was arbitrary. The appeal was dismissed. en-us Fri, 09 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jan 2026 09:31:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784772 An application under IBC s.9 based on alleged operational debt was held time-barred because any acknowledgement after expiry of the three-year limitation does not extend limitation, and a journal entry transferring earlier Jamnagar-unit liabilities to another unit merely shifted book entries without creating a fresh cause of action; accordingly, invoices already beyond three years could not be enforced in insolvency and the threshold was not met. A signed ledger/balance confirmation was found ambiguous and lacking any clear promise to pay, so it did not attract Contract Act s.25(3) to create a fresh contractual obligation; the debt therefore remained time-barred. Interest was disallowed as invoices contained no interest terms and the computation was arbitrary. The appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws IBC Fri, 09 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784772