9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Applicant resulted in passing of a reassessment order dated 15.05.2012 under which a sum of Rs. 4,85,74,377/- was assessed which was liable to be paid by R1. The said order was challenged by way of an appeal before the first appellate authority who partly allowed the same vide order dated 26.09.2012. As both the Applicant and the R1 were aggrieved by the said appellate orders, cross-appeals came to be filed before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal and the said cross-appeals came to be disposed off by the Tribunal by way of an order dated 27.09.2017. In consequence thereof, the tax, interest and penalty payable by the R1 under the KVAT Act for the tax periods April 2010 to march 2011 was recomputed by the Applicant by way of an order dated 01.01.2018, in terms of which the total amount payable by the R1 amounted to Rs. 11,20,61,088/-. As R1 has failed to make payment of the said demand amount within the prescribed period, the applicant issued notice under Section 45 of the KVAT Act on 19.02.2018 to the bankers of the R1 directing them to pay the said amount to the Applicant in discharge of the R1's liability. However, the fact that the R1 Company is under CIRP by order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ator of R1/Corporate Debtor, a public announcement was made on 15.10.2018 in Business Standard (Chennai) and Vijaya Karnataka (Raichur) calling for the claims against R1/Corporate Debtor and that the last date was mentioned specifically in the publication as 10.11.2018. However, the claim with the Liquidator was lodged on 08.05.2019 thereby resulting in a delay of six months which prompted the R2 to send a letter of rejection dated 13.05.2019 as the Liquidator by virtue of the provisions of the I&B Code, 2016 has no power to condone delay in filing the claims with the Liquidator. 6. It is also brought to the notice of this Tribunal by R2/Liquidator that the delay of lodging the claims by the Applicant as against the decision of the Liquidator, the Applicant had approached this Tribunal beyond the specified time limit of 14 days as provided under Section 42 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) and in the circumstance this Application which has been filed before this Tribunal, in view of the delay in filing the Application with the prayers as sought for by the Applicant is liable to be rejected. 7. The submissions of the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and the Ld. Liquid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been filed. In the circumstances, Ld. Liquidator represents that it is left to this Tribunal to decide on the Application. 10. In the scheme, of Liquidation as provided under I&B Code, 2016, the Liquidator is required to receive or collect the claims of the creditors within a period of 30 days from the date of commencement of the liquidation process, in the instant case i.e., on 12.10.2018 which date is not in dispute. Further by virtue of sub-section (3) of Section 38 of I&B Code, 2016, it is seen that the Applicant being an Operational Creditor which is also not an issue anymore, as similarly placed tax authorities having been held as Operational Creditor by virtue of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble NCLAT in Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No.309 of 2018 in the matter of Sales Tax Department, State of Maharashtra, through Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax -vs- Raj Oil Mills Limited & Ors. dated 20.03.2019 and more particularly enunciated in Para 30 of the said decision of the Hon'ble NCLAT which reads as follows:- "30. For the said very reason, we also hold that 'Income Tax Department of the Central Government' and the 'Sales Tax Department(s) of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tabulation, it is evident that not only there has been a delay in lodging the claims with the Liquidator by the Applicant but in appealing against the decision of the Ld. Liquidator there has been a delay on the part of the Applicant by three days in approaching this Tribunal. From the records of this Tribunal, it is evident that no Application seeking for condonation of delay of three days has also filed before this Tribunal, as Section 42 has clearly laid-down as noted above, under which it is required of an Appeal to be filed within a period of 14 days from the decision of the Ld. Liquidator. Even though in the Application it is stated that the decision of the Liquidator was communicated to the Applicant on 21.05.2019, no evidence has been placed on record by the Applicant to support the statement, more so when an assertion is made by the Ld. Liquidator in his counter affidavit that the communication of rejection was received by the Applicant on 14.05.2019. 14. It is pertinent to note that in relation to the decision cited by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Applicant that of Mumbai Bench of the Hon'ble NCLT in Natwarlal Shamaldas & Co in MA/1098/2018 in C.P. No. 82/IBC/NC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
