9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 6X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issions made by the applicant. The Application under Section 14, 17(1) (d) read with Sections 18, 20 & 60 of IBC, 2016 also read with Rule 11 and Rule 15 of NCLT Rules, 2016, for seeking appropriate direction is taken on record. The arguments advanced by the counsel for GST have also been noted. The instant application is disposed off with a direction to the State Goods and Services Tax Department to accept physical filing of returns after the commencement of CIRP and it is further directed that in case any GST relating to the period after the commencement of CIRP has not been deposited the same shall be deposited within a period of two weeks, if not deposited earlier. The Resolution Professional is directed to complete the physical filing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led to appreciate Section 238 of the IBC, 2016 and ignored the factual state of affairs of effect of moratorium under Section 14. Therefore, the order dated 06.12.2019 passed by the said court is void ab-initio and, being contrary to the provisions of Section 14 as well as Section 238 of IBC, 2016, is non-est in law. In this regard, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly held in the case of Alchemist Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. Vs. M/s. Hotel Gaudavan Pvt. Ltd. in (Civil Appeal No. 16929 of 2017) the following: - 3) The facts of the present case disclose a very sorry state of affairs. Several proceedings had been taken and ultimately a petition filed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was admitted on 31.03.2017 by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a) expressly interdicts institution or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against Corporate Debtors. 6) This being the case, we are surprised that an arbitration proceeding has been purported to be started after the imposition of the said moratorium and appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act are being entertained. Therefore, we set aside the order of the District Judge dated 06.07.2017 and further state that the effect of Section 14(1) (a) is that the arbitration that has been instituted after the aforesaid moratorium is non est in law. 7) Mr. Jayant Bhushan, learned Senior Counsel, also informs us that criminal proceeding being F.I.R. No. 0605 dated 06.08.2017 has been taken in a desperate attempt to see that the IRP d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
