TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1203
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Kolkata Bench, Kolkata by which Section 7 application filed by the Appellant has been rejected by the Adjudicating Authority on the ground that disbursement has not been proved and application is barred by limitation. 2. Brief facts necessary to be noticed to decide the appeal are: 2.1 The Appellant Bank claimed to have disbursed the amount to the Corporate Debtor of Rs.46.16 Crores in the year 2013. The default was committed by the Corporate Debtor on 19.09.2025. 2.2 The proceedings were initiated by the Bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debt and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 being OA No.609 of 2016 which is pending consideration. 2.3 Section 7 application was filed by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Debtor not appearing before the Adjudicating Authority and not disputing the disbursement, the Adjudicating Authority ought not to have returned that finding. 6. Coming to the submission of the Appellant regarding application being barred by limitation, the date of default is 19.09.2015 and Section 7 application was filed on 10.12.2019 i.e. beyond three years. Two submissions have been advanced to contend said argument. First is that the amounts were deposited in the account of the Corporate Debtor on two dates i.e. 25.11.2016 of Rs.89,11,116/- and Rs.1000/- on 17.12.2016. Coming to the amount which are shown in the bank statement, the deposit on 25.11.2016 does not give benefit to the Appellant since application was filed after three ye....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee years. Even if the period between the date of the notice under Section 13(2) and date of the interim order [Debitech Fabtech (P) Ltd. v. Baidyabati Seoraphully Coop. Bank Ltd., 2017 SCC OnLine Cal 9738] of the High Court staying the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, on the prima facie ground of want of jurisdiction is excluded, the proceedings under Section 7 IBC are still within limitation of three years. 86. An adjudicating authority under IBC is not a substitute forum for a collection of debt in the sense it cannot reopen debts which are barred by law, or debts, recovery whereof have become time-barred. The adjudicating authority does not resolve disputes, in the manner of suits, arbitrations a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e". It is well settled that omission to refer to the correct section of a statute does not vitiate an order. At the cost of repetition it is reiterated that delay can be condoned irrespective of whether there is any formal application, if there are sufficient materials on record disclosing sufficient cause for the delay." 8. Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was a case where SARFAESI proceeding were initiated which were prima facie without jurisdiction and on the said ground the High Court has already stayed the said proceedings that they are prima facie without jurisdiction, benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act was extended in the said background. Present is a case, where benefit of Section 14 of Limitation Act is claimed on ....