9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 379X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 42(1) dated 29-03-2019 and others were issued, the assessee failed to response to the notices but ultimately on 01-02-2021 a letter was received from Insolvency Resolution Professional (IRP). Shri Vikash Gautamohand Jain that National Company Law Tribunal (hereinafter referred as NCLT) vide its order dated 29-05- 2019 passed an order for commencement of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), in CP (IB) No. 602/9/NCLT/AHM/2018. As per Section 14(1) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) the order of moratorium shall have effect from the date of such order till the completion of CIRP. Therefore IRP requested the A.O. not to proceed with the assessment further. However the Assessing Officer sent one more notice u/s. 142(1) notice to the IRP and completed the assessment that the assessee claimed expenditure to the tune of Rs. 59,20,48,980/- as follows: Cost of Trading Goods 16,25,13,519/- Changes in inventories of finished goods 21,77,30,131/- Employees benefit expenses 3,81,66,429/- Finance Costs 7,56,35,781/- Other Administrative & Selling & Operation expenses 9,80,03,120/- Total 59,20,48,980/- 2.1. Since neither the assessee nor the IRP filed any details ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and prejudicial to the interest of revenue on the alleged ground that expenses of Rs. 44,40,36, 735/- out of total expenses claimed of Rs. 59, 20, 48, 980/- was not disallowed by AO in absence of any details with supportive evidence submitted by the appellant. 3. Ld. Pr. CIT erred in law and on facts in revising the order on the alleged ground that AO made ad hoc disallowance of 25% of total expenses whereas he ought to have disallowed whole of expenses which remained unexplained by the appellant. 4. Ld. Pr. CIT erred in law and on facts initiating revisionary proceedings of an order subsequent to final resolution plan approved by NCLT vide order dated 20.12.2022 under IBC code 2016 already brought to the notice of revenue. 5. Ld. Pr. CIT erred in law and on facts revising an assessment order that ought not to have been passed during the moratorium period when the appellant company was under Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process pursuant to NCLT order. 6. Ld. Pr. CIT erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that all the liabilities of Corporate debtor gets extinguished after payment of the dues to the creditors as per resolution plan and other claims including Govern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... known, secured or unsecured, disputed or undisputed, present or future, in relation to any period prior to the Effective Date pursuant to this Resolution Plan, shall stand extinguished by virtue of the order of the NCLT approving this Resolution Plan and the Corporate Debtor and Resolution Applicant shall not be liable to pay any amount against such demand. All assessments/appellate or other proceedings pending in case of the Corporate Debtor, on the date of the order of NCLT relating to the period prior to that date, shall stand terminated and all consequential liabilities, if any, shall be deleted and shall be considered to be not payable by the Corporate Debtor by virtue of the order of the NCLT. All notices proposing to initiate any proceedings against the Corporate Debtor in relation to the period prior to the date of the NCLT order and pending on that date shall be considered deleted and shall not be proceeded against. Post the order of the NCLT, no re-assessment/revision or any other proceedings under the provisions of the IT Act shall be initiated on the Corporate Debtor or Resolution Applicant in relation to period prior to the Effective Date and any consequential demand s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid stakeholders prior to CIRP against the corporate debtor shall stand permanently extinguished and other claims including Government/Statutory Authority, whether lodged during CIRP or not, shall stand extinguished after the approval of the resolution plan. We further hold that contingent/unconfirmed dues shall also stand extinguished: b) From the date of this order, all claims against the corporate debtor, except those provided in the resolution plan of the Corporate Debtor stand extinguished. c) From the date of this order, all encumbrances on the assets of the Corporate Debtor before the plan shall stand permanently extinguished. 10.1. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons Pvt. Ltd. (cited supra) held as follows: "95. In the result, we answer the questions framed by us as under: (i) That once a resolution plan is duly approved by the Adjudicating Authority under Sub-section (1) of Section 31, the claims as provided in the resolution plan shall stand frozen and will be binding on the Corporate Debtor and its employees, members, creditors, including the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority, guarantors and other stake ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecovery 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 dated 14.10.2021 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: "10.2. NCLT found, that by email dated 6.1.2018, EARC had submitted its claim in Form 'C' for an amount of Rs. 648,89,62,,395/-. In response to the said email, RP sought a clarification, as to whether the corporate guarantee had been invoked by the applicant. RP had not received any response till 21.2.2018 from EARC. Despite repeated requests made by RP, EARC did not respond to the query made by RP. From the record placed before NCLT, it was clear, that EARC had not invoked the corporate guarantee. NCLT ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
