TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 2112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt has already de-attached the properties belonging to the corporate debtor and accordingly, the possession by the Resolution Professional may be taken. It is directed that the title deed be handed over to the Resolution Professional at the earliest but not later than ten days. However, in respect of SEBI-respondent No. 1 the stand taken is that it is bound by the directions issued by the Securities Appellate Tribunal. The aforesaid stand is in the teeth of the observation of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Monnet Ispat case (Supra). There is only one condition imposed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court that the code is to override anything inconsistent in any other enactment. It is obvious that various provisions in the Insolvency Bank ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hit Sehgal, Party-in-Person, Sanyan Saxena, J.D. Bahuah, Advs. Shel Rishabh Ritesh Agarwal, Lakshmi Gurung, Sr. standing counsel and Easha Kadian ORDER M.M. Kumar, C.J. (President) (Oral) CA-359(PB)/2019 This is an application filed by the Resolution professional with a prayer for issuance of direction to SEBI-respondent No. 1 to de-attach the immovable property belonging to the corporate debtor which have been attached vide order dated 29.09.2017 passed by the Recovery Officer, SEBI, Northern Regional Office, New Delhi and thereafter, to hand over the original title deeds of the immovable properties to the Resolution Professional. Another prayer has also been made seeking direction to Department of Income Tax-respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainst the order of the SAT could be filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court as per the provision of Section 15Z of the SEBI Act. 4. No reply by Income Tax Department-respondent No. 2 has been filed. However, some documents have been placed on record in a letter addressed to the standing counsel on 09.04.2019 by the Office of the Tax Recovery Officer (TDS-1). It has been informed that the property which was attached has already been de-attached as per the details given and the letter reads as under:- In this regard, please find enclosed copy of de-attachment/Releasement letters of property attached under second Schedule of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide letters F. No.: TRO/TDS-1/DEL/HBN/Revoc. Order/2019-20/21 22 dated 09.04.2019 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x v. Monnet Ispat and Energy Ltd. SLP(C) No. 6487/2018 decided on 10.08.2018 and has argued that on account of non-obstante clause contained in Section 238 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 2016 all other statues and enactment have to give way to the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code. The aforesaid contention of Mr. Datta find ample support from the view taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Monnet Ispat (supra). The short order passed by the Lordship of the Supreme Court reads as under:- Given Section 238 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, it is obvious that the code will override anything inconsistent contained in any other enactment, including the Income-Tax Act. We may also refer in this connection to Dena Bank v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o take possession of the property belonging to the corporate debtor. It need not be to emphasised that the provisions of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code would come in conflict with the stand taken by the SEBI-respondent No. 1. In other words, the provisions of Section 11 11B of the SEBI Act read with Regulation 65 of the Securities Exchange Board of India (Collective Investment Scheme) Regulations, 1999 would be directly in conflict with Section 238 as well as Sections 14, 15, 17, 18 25 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code. The omnibus provision made in Section 14 would also be in conflict with the stand taken by SEBI as no execution proceedings under the provisions of SEBI Act or its regulation can take place during the CIR Process u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
