ORDER : 1. By consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for final hearing. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. A brief reference to the facts of the case will be necessary. 4. By order dated 19th March, 2020, an application filed by the respondent-Bank under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short, "the IB Code") against the appellant was dismissed by the National Company Law Tribunal (for short, "the NCLT") on the ground of bar of limitation. In an appeal preferred by the respondent, by the impugned judgment, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (for short, "the NCLAT") has interfered and has held that the application was within the limitation and directed the adjudicating authority to consider the application afresh by treating it as filed within the period of limitation and decide the same in accordance with law. 5. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we find that the NCLAT has relied upon a letter dated 25th October, 2019 for coming to the conclusion that Section 25(3) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 will apply and in view of the promise contained in the same letter, the petition under Section 7 of the IB Code was within the limitation. 6. However, the admitted position is that the letter dated 25th October, 2019 was not produced by the respondent before the NCLT and it was produced for the first time in the appeal preferred by the respondent before the NCLAT. The finding on the issue of bar of limitation has been upset by the NCLAT mainly relying upon the letter dated 25th October, 2019. 7. As the said letter was not produced by the respondent before the NCLT, the present appellant could not deal with the said letter before the NCLT. Therefore, the direction of remand issued in paragraph 11 of the impugned judgment needs modification. 8. Accordingly, we modify the order of remand contained in paragraph 11 of the impugned judgment by clarifying that it will be open for the respondent to produce the letter dated 25th October, 2019 before the NCLT. 9. We also clarify that the issue of limitation which was concluded by the NCLAT under the impugned judgment will remain open to be considered by the NCLT in accordance with law. 10. 9. We also clarify that the issue of limitation which was concluded by the NCLAT under the impugned judgment will remain open to be considered by the NCLT in accordance with law. 10. Subject to the above modification, the appeal is partly allowed by leaving open all questions for consideration of the NCLT.