Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2024 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 654 - AT - Income TaxAssessment against company dissolved/insolvent - proceedings initiated against the corporate debtor/assessee company including income tax proceedings and recovery of demand or giving effect of any order - Addition u/s 68 - transaction of share capital and share premium which was taken from different entities against the high premium - HELD THAT:- As per the provisions of section 14 of the IBC Code institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgement, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority shall be prohibited during the moratorium period. Section 31 of the IBC relates to approval of the resolution plan and in terms of Section 31(1) of the IBC on approval, the resolution plan becomes binding on corporate debtor and its employees, members, creditors including the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority to whom a debt in respect of payment of dues arising under any law for the time being in force. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ghanashyam Mishra [2021 (4) TMI 613 - SUPREME COURT] has considered the scope of Section 31 (1) of the IBC and has held that once the resolution plan is sanctioned under Section 31(1) of the IBC, the claims provided in the plan will stand frozen and all such claims which are not part of the plan will stand extinguished. Thus, the law is well settled that on the approval of the resolution plan in terms of Section 31 of the IBC, the dues including the statutory dues of the Government or local authority, if not part of the resolution plan, gets extinguished and no proceedings in respect thereof for a period prior to the date of approval under Section 31 would continue. The decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta HighCourt in West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited vs. Sri Vasavi Industries Limited [2022 (7) TMI 580 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] makes it clear that any claim not made during the course of CIRP and before approval of resolution plan shall automatically be extinguished and the corporate debtor is deemed to start its operations with a clean slate after the resolution plan is approved. It has been consistently held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the IBC is a complete Code in itself and in view of the provisions of Section 238 of the IBC, the provisions of the IBC would prevail notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force. We are of the view that as per section 31 of the Code, resolution plan as and when approved by the Adjudicating Authority shall be binding on the corporate debtor and its employees, members, creditors, guarantors, and other stakeholders involved in the resolution plan. Thus, this will prevent State authorities and Regulatory bodies including Direct & Indirect Tax Departments from questioning the resolution plan. Thus, in view of the above, no proceedings can be initiated against the corporate debtor, that is, assessee company including income tax proceedings and recovery of demand or giving effect of any order. It is well settled now that IBC has an overriding effect on all the acts including Income Tax Act which has been specifically provided u/s 178(6) of the I.T. Act as amended w.e.f. 01.11.2016. However, depending upon the result of such proceedings before the adjudicating authority in respect of the corporate debtor, appropriate steps if any, may be taken by the appellant. We, therefore, granting, leave to the appellant to seek the restoration of the appeal, if necessitated by the orders in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Proceedings. Issue of limitation in filing fresh appeal, if need be, has already been dealt with in Hon’ble Supreme Court in NDMC-v-Minosha (India) Ltd. [2022 (5) TMI 1123 - SUPREME COURT] wherein on consideration of Section 60(6) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, it was held that the entire moratorium period will be excluded in computing limitation in respect of proceedings at the hand of a corporate debtor.
|