Home Insolvency & Bankruptcy CIRP Application Barred By Time Should Be Rejected Even If No Defence Of Limitation Raised

CIRP Application Barred By Time Should Be Rejected Even If No Defence Of Limitation Raised

0
CIRP Application Barred By Time Should Be Rejected Even If No Defence Of Limitation Raised

The Nationwide Firm Regulation Appellate Tribunal (‘NCLAT’), Principal Bench, New Delhi comprising of Mahendra Khandelwal (Judicial Member) and Rahul Bhatnagar (Technical Member), dismissed an enchantment filed in Sheetal Impex Pvt. Ltd. vs. Shree Swastic Gross sales Company Pvt. Ltd. by Sheetal Impex Pvt. Ltd. (Appellant) towards Shree Swastic Gross sales Company Pvt. Ltd. (Company Debtor) difficult the NCLT New Delhi’s order dated 15.03.2023 rejecting an software underneath Part 7 of the Insolvency and Chapter Code (‘Code’) as barred by time.

Background Info:

The Utility underneath Part 7 of the Code was filed on 04.02.2020 which was held to be barred by time by the NCLT New Delhi Bench. The Appellant contended that there was affirmation of the account by the Company Debtor on 01.04.2016 and additional TDS deduction was made on 09.06.2016. It’s submitted that the Utility filed on 04.02.2020, thus, was not barred by time.

NCLAT Verdict:

The NCLAT Principal Bench, New Delhi dismissed the enchantment citing the Part 7 software underneath the Code as barred by time, and held that an software that’s barred by time must be rejected by the Court docket even when no Defence of Limitation was raised.

The Tribunal noticed that the quantity turned due on 01.04.2016 and the problem of limitation was by no means raised earlier than the Court docket. Moreover, the Appellant submitted a letter dated 01.04.2016 to affirm the accounts. It noticed that even whether it is agreed that the affirmation of accounts prolonged the limitation interval for the Appellant, the Utility underneath Sectio 7 of the Code was filed on 04.02.2020 and was nonetheless time-barred even after April 1, 2016. Additional, the TDS deduction on 09.06.2016 doesn’t have an effect on the limitation interval in any approach.

Case Title: Sheetal Impex Pvt. Ltd. vs. Shree Swastic Gross sales Company Pvt. Ltd.

Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 640 of 2023

Click on Right here To Learn/Obtain Order

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here