<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (2) TMI 241 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786046</link>
    <description>A Section 7 insolvency application was found to be within limitation because invocation of the corporate guarantee triggered the limitation period, balance-sheet entries constituted acknowledgments under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, and the Covid exclusion period applied. The record also showed that amounts realised in liquidation and from another insolvency proceeding were considered only to determine the surviving debt and default, not to dilute the creditor&#039;s case. Since the application disclosed the essential particulars and a substantial unpaid balance remained, no suppression or jurisdictional error was shown in assessing default, and the admission order was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2026 09:16:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=884354" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 241 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786046</link>
      <description>A Section 7 insolvency application was found to be within limitation because invocation of the corporate guarantee triggered the limitation period, balance-sheet entries constituted acknowledgments under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, and the Covid exclusion period applied. The record also showed that amounts realised in liquidation and from another insolvency proceeding were considered only to determine the surviving debt and default, not to dilute the creditor&#039;s case. Since the application disclosed the essential particulars and a substantial unpaid balance remained, no suppression or jurisdictional error was shown in assessing default, and the admission order was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786046</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>