9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (9) TMI 57 - HC - Companies LawGrant of relief under Sections 41(1), 45, 72(3) and 115 JB of the Income Tax Act, in compliance with the Scheme sanctioned by the BIFR - Held that - The petitioner is granted liberty to approach NCLT, Calcutta for appropriate relief, as advised. Liberty is also granted to the respondents to approach NCLT, Calcutta for seeking transfer of such a petition, as and when filed by the petitioner, which shall then be decided in accordance with law.
Issues involved:
1. Relief under Sections 41(1), 45, 72(3), and 115 JB of the Income Tax Act in compliance with the Scheme sanctioned by the BIFR. 2. Amendment of the cut-off date in the Scheme sanctioned by the BIFR and extension of the period of rehabilitation. 3. Jurisdiction of the NCLT for approaching appropriate relief. Analysis: Issue 1: Relief under Income Tax Act The petitioner sought relief under various sections of the Income Tax Act in compliance with the Scheme sanctioned by the BIFR. The High Court considered the petitioner's plea and noted the previous order dated 17.8.2017 in a related petition. The counsel for the petitioner highlighted the need for relief under the specified sections, emphasizing the importance of compliance with the Scheme sanctioned by the BIFR. Issue 2: Amendment of the Scheme and Extension of Rehabilitation Period In a previous petition, the petitioner had requested an amendment of the cut-off date in the Scheme sanctioned by the BIFR and an extension of the rehabilitation period. The High Court reviewed the order dated 17.8.2017 in that petition, which had provided some clarifications by the Government of India to address stakeholder difficulties. The counsel for the respondents had no objection to granting similar liberty to the petitioner in the current case, suggesting that the petitioner approach the NCLT in Delhi for necessary orders. Issue 3: Jurisdiction of NCLT for Seeking Relief A key contention arose regarding the jurisdiction of the NCLT for seeking relief under the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The counsel for the petitioner argued that as per the Code, the company should approach the NCLT in the jurisdiction of its registered office, which in this case was in West Bengal. Therefore, the petitioner had no option but to approach the NCLT in Calcutta for appropriate orders. In conclusion, the High Court disposed of the present petition in line with the order dated 17.8.2017 from the related petition. The petitioner was granted liberty to approach the NCLT in Calcutta for necessary relief, with the option for the respondents to seek a transfer of the petition to NCLT, Delhi if filed by the petitioner. The judgment addressed the issues of relief under the Income Tax Act, amendment of the Scheme, and the jurisdiction of the NCLT, ensuring compliance with legal provisions and granting appropriate directions for further proceedings.
|
