The appellate tribunal clarified that bankruptcy proceedings against a personal guarantor cannot be allowed to continue merely for failure to file a repayment plan, particularly where parties mutually extend time to file a compliant proposal. Any earlier admission under Section 123 must be recalled, and the process must revert to the statutory stage under Section 106 IBC.

The appellate tribunal held that disputed receivables cannot be enforced in liquidation through summary jurisdiction under Section 60(5) IBC. It clarified that financial statement entries do not constitute admission of liability, requiring the Liquidator to pursue contractual or judicial remedies.

The Appellate Tribunal held that Section 7 claims cannot rely on RP acknowledgments from prior CIRP to revive limitation. Limitation is calculated from the statutory default date, and petitions filed beyond this period remain time-barred.

The Appellate Tribunal held that Rule 11 jurisdiction cannot be used to recall an order decided on merits, as inherent powers extend only to correcting procedural lapses such as lack of notice or fraud.

The Appellate Tribunal held that the IBBI’s 18.07.2023 letter cannot supersede Section 34 IBC and that an RP has no vested right to be appointed as liquidator, rendering mid-process replacement unwarranted when liquidation has advanced with CoC backing.

The Appellate Tribunal clarified that an Operational Creditor may claim set-off of admitted mutual dues while filing Form-B during CIRP, even during the moratorium, provided such dues are undisputed, quantifiable and arise from identifiable transactions.

The NCLAT ruled that IU uploads cannot extend limitation for independent invoices under Section 9 of the IBC. Each invoice forms a distinct cause of action, and partial payments or invoice-specific acknowledgments cannot revive claims barred by limitation, making the petition time-barred.

Section 32A immunity under the IBC does not override PMLA attachments that were validly imposed and attained finality before commencement of CIRP; only PMLA authorities can grant relief, and NCLT/NCLAT cannot order their release.

The NCLAT confirmed that a fully completed property transfer—backed by registered documents, payment and possession—left no surviving rights for the legal heir, thereby validating the Adjudicating Authority’s direction under Section 60(5) to execute the Sale Deed during resolution plan implementation.

NCLAT held that a bona fide pre-existing dispute bars Section 9 admission and the Adjudicating Authority’s role is limited to assessing plausibility.