2019 (3) TMI 396 - HC - Income Tax

Recovery proceedings - Notice u/s 226(3) - effect of application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - whether the petitioner or the respondent-bank/department would have precedence to recover the outstanding liabilities from M/s R. P. Basmati Rice Ltd.? - HELD THAT - As stated an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 filed by the respondents has been admitted by the National Company Law Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (in short 'NCLT') and Moratorium under Section 14(1) of the Code has been declared. In view of the above, we declare the Moratorium in terms of sub section (1) of Section 14 of the Code as under - (a) the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any Court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority; - (b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest therein; -(c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its property including any action under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002; - (d) the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where such property is occupied by or in the possession of the corporate debtor. Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that in view of the Moratorium issued by NCLT, the present petition has become infructuous and may be disposed of as such.

Summary

Issues:
1. Priority of recovery between petitioner and respondent-bank/department regarding outstanding liabilities from M/s R. P. Basmati Rice Ltd.
2. Impact of Moratorium declared under Section 14(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 on the present writ petition.

Analysis:
1. The primary issue in the writ petition was the precedence for recovering outstanding liabilities from M/s R. P. Basmati Rice Ltd. The petition was filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash a notice issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by respondent No.2. Both parties agreed that an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 had been admitted by the National Company Law Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, declaring a Moratorium under Section 14(1) of the Code. This Moratorium affected the recovery process, rendering the present petition infructuous.

2. The Moratorium issued by the NCLT had significant implications on the present writ petition. It encompassed various restrictions, including the institution or continuation of suits, transferring or disposing of assets, enforcing security interests, and property recovery actions against the corporate debtor. The counsel for both parties acknowledged that due to the Moratorium, the petition had lost its relevance and should be disposed of accordingly. Therefore, the court ordered the disposal of the petition in light of the Moratorium declared under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues of priority in recovering outstanding liabilities and the impact of the Moratorium under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 on the writ petition, ultimately leading to its disposal.