https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789000 Proceedings under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 were not time-barred where the record contained later acknowledgements of liability, including balance-sheet entries, one-time settlement proposals and email admissions of default; under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963, such acknowledgements extend limitation, and the recovery certificate also supplied a fresh cause of action. The objection that the appeal could not continue after substitution of the deceased appellant's legal heir was rejected because substitution had already been permitted and the substituted appellant was prosecuting the pending litigation in continuation of the original claim. On those grounds, the challenge to admission of CIRP failed. en-us Mon, 12 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Apr 2026 08:50:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789000 Proceedings under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 were not time-barred where the record contained later acknowledgements of liability, including balance-sheet entries, one-time settlement proposals and email admissions of default; under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963, such acknowledgements extend limitation, and the recovery certificate also supplied a fresh cause of action. The objection that the appeal could not continue after substitution of the deceased appellant's legal heir was rejected because substitution had already been permitted and the substituted appellant was prosecuting the pending litigation in continuation of the original claim. On those grounds, the challenge to admission of CIRP failed. Case-Laws IBC Mon, 12 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789000