9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d under Section 148A (d) of the Act dated 23.03.2022 as well as the impugned notices dated 13.03.2022 passed under Section 148A (b) of the Act, notice dated 31.03.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act and notice dated 12.03.2023 issued under Section 156 of the Act for Assessment Year 2018-19. 4. The brief facts are as under : 4.1. The petitioner is a company incorporated in India and are entitled to the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India and the respondent is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and therefore, it is amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court. 4.2. It is the case of the petitioner that a Company Petition (I.B.) No: 148 of 2019 was fled by Operational Creditor namely, Devsaria Iron & Steel Co. Pvt. Ltd., under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short 'the Code') for initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (for short 'the CIRP') before the National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench (for short 'the NCLT'). 4.3. Vide order dated 30.09.2019, the NCLT admitted the Company Petition (I.B.) No 148 of 2019. Accordingly, the Interi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onal informed that two of the Resolution Applicants had decided to withdraw their prospective Resolutions Plans. Therefore, a 2nd Eol was published and three Resolution Plans were received in the Ninth CoC. 4.9. In the Tenth CoC meeting held on 06.11.2020, Resolution Professional stated that one Resolution Applicant being Ganeshram Chaudhari and Divyaben Makwana withdrew their Resolution Plan. CoC discussed the remaining Resolution Plans and suggested some changes. Resolution Applicant, Shyam Plastic Machinery, submitted that they had already submitted their best offer. 4.10. In the Eleventh CoC meeting held on 19.11.2020, after further revision of the Resolution Plan received from N.A. Roto Machines and Moulds India, its Resolution Plan was put for e-voting from 24.11.2020 to 27.11.2020. In the said e-voting, the Resolution Plan was approved by a majority of 96.37% of the CoC members and after following the procedure of law, the Resolution plan was approved. 4.11. Thereafter, the Resolution Professional filed an application being Interlocutory Application No. 26 of 2020 in Company Petition (I.B.) No. 148 of 2019 before the Hon'ble NCLT under Section 30 (6) of the Code for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice under Section 148 of the Act. Therefore, on 31.03.2022, the respondent No. 1 issued a notice under Section 148 of the Act. 4.19. It is the case of the petitioner that initiation of proceedings for Assessment Year 2018-19 is without jurisdiction and illegal in law and for the purpose of reassessment, respondent No. 1 issued notices under Section 142 (1) of the Act to the petitioner dated 21.10.2022, 24.11.2022, and 02.02.2023 asking to furnish certain information and a show-cause notice was issued on 17.02.2023. 4.20. The petitioner in its replies dated 07.12.2022, 04.02.2023 and 23.02.2023 informed the respondents that in the case of Perfect Boring Private Limited, a Resolution Plan has been approved by the NCLT, Ahmedabad vide order dated 16.03.2021 and therefore, no notices under the Act can be issued for assessments, reassessments or unpaid tax claims of any prior period and the notices issued by the respondent authorities for Assessment Year 2018-19 are invalid, non-est and without any jurisdiction. 4.21. However, the respondent No. 1 has passed the impugned assessment order dated 12.03.2023 under Section 147 read with Section 144 and 144B of the Act determining the to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dent for revising the demand for the Assessement Year 2018-19. It was submitted that in view of clear statutory provision, the powers of the respondent cannot be curtailed when procedure in accordance with law has been followed. He further submitted that the decision relied upon by the petitioner in case of Ghanashyam Mishra (Supra) is with regard to extinguish of the claim after approval of resolution plan by NCLT as in the present case, the proceedings under Section 263 of the Act has been initiated and this being not the recovery proceedings, the decision would not be applicable. 7. Considering the submissions made on behalf of both the sides and upon perusal of the record, it is noticed that pursuant to insolvency proceedings initiated under the Code, a resolution plan was approved by the Tribunal under Section 30 (6) of the Code. It is also on record that the claim which was lodged by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot was verified and admitted in the proceedings before NCLT after consideration of the claim filed by the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot. In the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Ghanashyam Mishra (Supra) it is held as under : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
