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

2024 (12) TMI 1116

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r the Companies Act, 1956, with its registered office at 4, Mangoe Lane, 7th Floor, Kolkata, West Bengal-70001. The petitioner has consistently complied with the statutory requirements and fulfilled tax obligations in a timely manner under applicable laws. 3. For the assessment year 2016-17, the petitioner filed its return of income on November 29, 2016, declaring a loss of Rs. 2,09,79,33,681/-. This return was processed under Section 143 (1) of the Act on March 27, 2018, leading to a refund of Rs. 24,75,45,997/- sanctioned in favour of the petitioner. 4. The Bank of India subsequently initiated proceedings under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Kolkata Bench, for Corpo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t proceedings against the petitioner. 9. The Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the impugned reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148A (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the subsequent notices and orders issued under Sections 148A (d) and 148 are entirely without jurisdiction and ought to be quashed. The petitioner asserts that the respondent authorities have failed to adhere to the statutory requirements mandated under the Income Tax Act and have acted in a manner that is arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to established legal principles. 10. The petitioner contends that the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), which is a special statute, have an overriding effect over t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntive evidence. 13. Additionally, the petitioner submits that its detailed responses to the notices issued under Section 148A (b) were not given due consideration. The petitioner had specifically raised objections regarding the lack of jurisdiction and the bar on reassessment proceedings due to the provisions of the IBC and the resolution plan. However, these objections were summarily disregarded by the respondent authorities. 14. The petitioner contends that the actions of the respondent authorities, including the initiation and continuation of reassessment proceedings, constitute an abuse of power. The failure to conduct a proper inquiry, the reliance on incomplete and selective information, the disregard for statutory limitations, and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llated to substantiate the genuineness of the transactions. After due consideration of the submissions and upon making necessary inquiries, the respondent passed an order under Section 148A (d) on May 6, 2023, holding that the matter warranted reassessment and issued a notice under Section 148. 18. The petitioner, in compliance with the notice, filed its Return of Income on May 29, 2023. Thereafter, notice under Section 143 (2) was issued on June 18, 2024 and the petitioner responded on June 21, 2024. The respondents submits that the petitioner actively participated in the reassessment proceedings, acknowledging their lawfulness. 19. The respondents contend that the Resolution Plan approved by the NCLT does not prohibit reassessment proce .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e notice under Section 148, were in violation of the statutory preconditions under the Act. Section 14 of the IBC imposes a moratorium that prohibits proceedings against a company undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). Furthermore, the resolution plan approved by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has overriding authority, as per Section 238 of the IBC and expressly precludes reassessment or revision proceedings for the period prior to the effective date stipulated in the plan. The respondents' actions are in direct contravention of these provisions. 23. In Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons (P) Ltd. v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. reported in it was held that: "95. i) That once a resolution plan is duly 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