9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... COURT ] and M/S. Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd. v. Union Of India Ors. [ 2022 (3) TMI 60 - SUPREME COURT ] as held that once a resolution plan is duly approved by the adjudicating authority under Section 31(1), the claims as provided in the resolution plan shall stand frozen and will be 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 resol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Year 2010-11. Being aggrieved by the order of assessment, the Petitioner filed first Appeal before the CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar. However, the CIT(A)-1 decided in favour of revenue. Being aggrieved by such order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack, registered as ITA No.149/CTK/2015. 4. It is pertinent to mention here that the Petitioner was subjected to a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under section 7 of the IBC filed by one SREI Equipments Finance Limited. After admission of such application, CIRP Proceedings were initiated against the Petitioner-Company. Claims were invited by way of an advertisement in the newspaper, but the Income Tax Department did not place their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... solution plan which has been approved by the NCLT. If the amount of Rs. 14,26,69,327.27 does not include in the said amount, then in view of the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Monnet Ispat and Energy Umited (supra) as also the decision of Supreme Court in the case of M/s Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd. (supra), the liability stood frozen as on the date of approval by the NCLT and no such claim can be made against the assessee. 7. Being aggrieved by the order of the ITAT, the Revenue preferred an appeal before this Court, which was registered as Income Tax Appeal No.39 of 2023. This Court dismissed the appeal by order dated 02.03.2023, since the Assessing Officer himself while giving effect to the order of the ITAT passed In ITA No.149/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refunded an amount of Rs. 5,55,42,427.00 and Rs. 45,28,927.00, total amounting to Rs. 6,00,71,354.00. Hence this Writ Petition. II. SUBMISSIONS OF OPPOSITE PARTIES: 12. Per contra , learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Opp. Parties intently made the following submissions: 13. The petitioner vide this Writ Petition pleaded that the interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C aggregating Rs. 11,33,25,209/- were added in the impugned order without giving any opportunity. It may be highlighted that the interest Cess/surcharge are inbuilt factors applied automatically on taxes as per provisions of IT Act and no explanation is required before applying all these factors. Once any income is determined during any proceedings, the system automatically calcul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner was also dismissed before the learned CIT(A). As mentioned above, the petitioner moved petition before ITAT on the issues of addition made vide the 143(3) order dated 31/03/2013, which were restored by the ITAT Cuttack. The ITAT also directed to verify whether the amount of Rs. 6,98,24,230/- is inclusive of Rs. 14,26,69,327/- or not. It is pertinent to mention here that the ITAT did not quash the 143(3) order dated 31/03/2013 passed by Opp. Party No-2 rather the learned Tribunal has just restored the issues which the petitioner is portraying otherwise by quoting misleading facts. 17. The NCLT has only frozen the amount of Rs. 6,98,24,230/-. Further, it has not kept any other proceedings in abeyance. The impugned demand is the outcome ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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. Admittedly, the claim in respect of the demand which is the subject matter of the present proceedings was not lodged by the O.P.No. 2 after public announcements were issued under Sections 13 and 15 of the IBC. As such, on the date on which the Resolution Plan was approved by the learned NCLT, all claims stood frozen, and no claim, which is not a part of the Resolution Plan, would survive. 21. In t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
