9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 654X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee. As noted here public announcement under Section 15 of the Code called for submission of claims by 21.01.2019, but the respondents/revenue did not file any claim till that date or even thereafter; it is only subsequent to approval of the Resolution Plan vide order dated 05.11.2019 of the Tribunal, (which order was communicated to respondents/revenue on 02.12.2019) that the respondents/revenue issued the impugned Assessment Order and Demand Notice both dated 12.12.2019. Similarly, in the other writ petition the impugned notices and orders were issued by the respondents/revenue much subsequent to the public announcement dated 30.09.2019 of commencement of CIRP under Section 13 of the Code; vide order dated 21.02.2022, the Tribunal approved the final Resolution Plan and that order was communicated by the petitioner/assessee to the respondents/revenue, calling upon the latter to withdraw the earlier notices, but to no avail. Thus as the Resolution Plans qua the petitioners/assessees having been approved by the National Company Law Tribunal on 05.11.2019 and on 21.02.2022 respectively, the tax claims pertaining to the Assessment Year 2017-18 and Assessment Year 2014-15 st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee, along with corresponding Demand Notice dt. 24.03.2022 under Section 156 I.T. Act, as being illegal, void and de-hors the binding provisions of the resolution plan duly approved by the Hon ble Adjudicating Authority vide order dt. 05.11.2019 u/s 31(1) of the IBC, 2016. d) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ/Order(s)/Direction(s) to call for all the relevant records of Respondent No. 2 and to quash/set aside Order dt. 10.09.2021 under section 272A(1)(d) of the I.T. Act levying an unwarranted penalty of Rs. 10,000/- upon the Assessee, along with corresponding Demand Notice dt. 10.09.2021 u/s 156 I.T. Act, as being illegal, void and dehors the binding provisions of the resolution plan, duly approved by the Hon ble Adjudicating Authority vide order dt. 05.11.2019 u /s 31(1) of the IBC, 2016. e) Issue a writ of Prohibition or any other appropriate Writ/Order(s)/Direction(s) to restrain and prohibit Respondent No. 2 from re-opening such claims against the Assessee/Petitioner which arise out of Pre-CIRP liabilities/obligations of the Assessee, as the same stood settled, waived and extinguished upon approval of the Resolution Plan by the Hon ble Adjudi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egarding approval of the Resolution Plan and change of management of Albus India Ltd under order dated 05.11.2019 of the Tribunal was communicated to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Delhi by the Chairman of the Monitoring Committee to implement the approved plan. It is thereafter that the respondents/revenue passed Assessment Order and Demand Notice, both dated 12.12.2019 against the petitioner/assessee qua Assessment Year 2017-18, raising a tax claim of Rs. 9,71,79,357/-. Thereafter, order dated 10.09.2021 under Section 272A(1)(d) of the Act and a Demand Notice dated 10.09.2021 were issued by the respondents/revenue, thereby levying penalty in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- against the petitioner/assessee. Thereafter, two show cause notices both dated 27.01.2022 under Sections 270A and 270AAC(1) of the Act were served by the respondents/revenue on the petitioner/assessee, who sent replies dated 27.01.2022, claiming that the demands were barred and extinguished consequent upon approval of the Resolution Plan by the Tribunal. The respondents/revenue issued demand notice dated 15.03.2022 under Section 156 of the Act, followed by order dated 16.03.2022 under Section 27 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing upon the respondent/revenue to withdraw the said notice as well as the previous notices and orders on account of successful resolution under the Code. However, 19.03.2022, the respondent/revenue passed the assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act in respect of income of the petitioner/assessee for the Assessment Year 2014-15. Finally, on 19.03.2022, the respondent/revenue issued Demand Notice, calling upon the petitioner/assessee to deposit Rs. 33,08,070/- in respect of Assessment Year 2014-15 within thirty days failing which the petitioner would be liable to pay interest, penalty and recovery proceedings under the Act; simultaneously on 19.03.2022, the respondent/revenue also issued show cause notice under Section 274 of the Act for penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act. Hence, the present writ petition WP(C) 10628/2022. 4. During final arguments, learned counsel for petitioner/assessee contended that the respondent/revenue arbitrarily issued the impugned orders and demand notices, ignoring the factual and legal ramifications which ensued upon conclusion of the insolvency proceedings of the petitioner/assessee, wherein a Resolution Plan qua the petitioner/asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... binding on the corporate debtor and its employees, members, creditors, including the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority, guarantors and other stakeholders. On the date of approval of resolution plan by the adjudicating authority, all such claims, which are not a part of resolution plan, shall stand extinguished and no person will be entitled to initiate or continue any proceedings in respect to a claim, which is not part of the resolution plan. ........ ........ 102.3. Consequently all the dues including the statutory dues owed to the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority, if not part of the resolution plan, shall stand extinguished and no proceedings in respect of such dues for the period prior to the date on which the adjudicating authority grants its approval under Section 31 could be continued. 7. The above quoted legal position and the judicial precedent were reiterated and referred to in the subsequent judgments in the cases of Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd vs Union of India, (2022) 6 SCC 343 and Sree Metaliks Ltd vs Additional Director General Ors, 2023/DHC/001118 . Most recently, vide order date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
