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

2022 (5) TMI 488

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rt of India, this delay may be condoned in respect of the claim made by the Appellant before the Liquidator. The Liquidator during arguments stated that in case the Adjudicating Authority condones the delay and direct the Liquidator to accept the claim, he is ready to accept the claim of the Appellant herein. The contention of the Liquidator that in case the claim of Appellant is admitted, they have priority over the Operational Creditor cannot be accepted, because the governmental claim cannot be neglected for the benefit of other stakeholders. Considering the Appellant being a governmental authority and in view of the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court, this Appeal is allowed and the Liquidator is directed to accept the claim made .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... period from October 2016 to March 2017. A show-cause notice was issued by the Appellant to the 2nd Respondent on 13.01.2020 demanding Central Excise duty of Rs.10,05,525/- along with interest under Section 11AA of Central Excise Act, 1944 and to impose a penalty under Section 11AC read with Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, as also under Rule 27 of the said rules. The Appellant confirmed the demand vide Order-in-Original dated 14.01.2020. 4. It is stated that the 2nd Respondent has not yet paid the Central Excise duty along with the interest and penalty to the credit of the Central Government despite repeated requests. The Appellant had sent numerous letters to the 2nd Respondent but none of the letters were responded to. Later .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... stated that a claim for Rs. 27,77,822/- as government dues, was made to the 1st Respondent for inclusion in the list of stakeholders. The said claim submitted by the Appellant was rejected by the 1st Respondent for the reason that there was a delay of 361 days in submitting the claim and under Section 31 of the Code, the Liquidator can only modify the list of stakeholders only as per the manner prescribed by this Tribunal. 6. It is further stated that even the functioning of the Appellant was limited and the delay occurred to submit the claims to the 1st Respondent is not due to any wilful laches on the part of the Appellant. In the claim, it was specifically pointed out that the application submitted to the 1st Respondent may be treated .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s vested with the Adjudicating Authority. Hence, the rejection of the claim of the Appellant by the 1st Respondent/ Liquidator is not arbitrary. 10. It is stated that no assets of the Company were sold at the time of filing of this Appeal. But, on 24th March 2022, plant and machinery as a whole of the Company was sold by way of e-auction for Rs. 3,25,00,000/-. Even though the land and building of the Company were also put for sale, no bid was received and hence it remains as unsold. The liquidation value of the land and building of the Company is Rs. 1,69,98,000/-. The total claim admitted by the liquidator is Rs. 7,71,12,092/-. It is further stated that there is no possibility of getting more than Rs. 7,71,12,092/-from the sale of all t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings 12. From a reading of the above order of the Hon ble Supreme Court we can decipher that even though there is a delay of 361 days in submitting the claim by the Appellant before the Liquidator, in view of the dictum laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in Miscellaneous Application No. 21/2022 in Miscellaneous Application No. 665/2021 in Suo Motu Writ Petition(C) No. 3 of 2020 this delay may be condoned in respect of the claim made by the Appellant before the Liquidator. The Liquidator during arguments stated that in case the Adjudicating Authority condones the delay and direct the Liquidator to accept the claim, he is ready to accept the claim of the Ap .....

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