Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (6) TMI 566

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Orders, 1946 issued by the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Government of Tamil Nadu under the Tamil Nadu Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules, 1946. In the present case, the Applicant has not given any documentary evidence as well as not furnished copies of IT returns as directed by this Tribunal dated 04.11.2019 and further stated that ITR V for assessment Years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 were only furnished and in regard to Form 26 AS for the Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2016-17 reflects that remuneration is being paid to the Applicant by the 2 Companies viz., M/s. TUV-SUD South Asia P. Ltd. and M/s. Kilburn Engineering Ltd. The claim of the Applicant seems to be a bogus one and hence the rejection order dated 28.01.2019 passed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , viz., Mr. Raghavendran, had been appointed as the Liquidator of the Company and Liquidation process of this Corporate Debtor was set in motion from 19.03.2018. 3. As per the original Application in MA/140/IB/2019, it is seen that the Corporate Debtor had averred in the Application that a copy of offer letter appointing him as a Head - Sales Marketing/EPC along with pay fixation details has been enclosed in the Application as Annexure-1 and on accepting the offer, it is stated that the Applicant had joined in the said post in the month of October, 2012 at Chennai, where he was posted. 4. It is also seen that the Applicant had been paid salary for a period of 5 months from October 2012 to February 2013 and his pay had been deposited .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l dated 21.01.2019, the Applicant had resubmitted his claim before the Liquidator which is enclosed as Annexure - 8. It is further stated that the impugned order of Rejection issued by the Liquidator is filed as Annexure - 9. 8. The Applicant has stated in his Application that the rejection of the claim is totally unsustainable and absence of co-operation from the Corporate Debtor to the Respondent/Liquidator cannot be taken as a ground for rejecting the Applicant's claim. He further stated that payment of five months' salary and deduction of TDS be considered as a prima facie proof to consider his claim by the Respondent/Liquidator. It is also averred that the TDS indicating as his employment was commenced from the date of 06.11 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d the records maintained by the Corporate Debtor also do not seems to show any evidence in this regard. The Respondent/Liquidator further stated in his counter that there was no co-operation rendered by the ex-Directors of the Corporate Debtor or its employees. It is further averred by the Respondent/Liquidator that he was unable to access the mails relating to the year 2014 as they are routed to the Corporate Debtor's official mail to which Respondent/Liquidator is unaware of the same and therefore he returned the laptop to the Corporate Debtor. It is further stated that there is no evidence to show that the Applicant was in employment continuously after March 2013 till the date of CIRP. It is further stated that the Corporate Debtor h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1946, the Applicant could not have engaged himself in any sort of such activity prohibited under Rule 18 (12) of the Standing Orders, 1946, which is the Service Manual followed by the Corporate Debtor for its employees. 14. It is further indicated by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent that the statements of the M/s. TUV-SUD South Asia P. Ltd. and M/s. Kilburn Engineering Ltd., are vital to bring out the fact of the true status of employment of the Applicant with the said Companies during the period which stands as a question to be answered. 15. In the present case, the Applicant has not given any documentary evidence as well as not furnished copies of IT returns as directed by this Tribunal dated 04.11.2019 and further stated tha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates