Case summary – CGST v. Dr. K.V. Srinivas, Liquidator of Veda Biofuel Ltd. – By Adv. Sai Sumed Yasaswi Kondapalli

Case summary – CGST v. Dr. K.V. Srinivas, Liquidator of Veda Biofuel Limited

Sai Sumed Yasaswi Kondapalli
Associate, Dharma Legal 


The National Company Law Tribunal Amaravati Bench (“NCLT”) dismissed an appeal filed by the Central Goods and Service Tax, Vizianagaram CGST Division (“CGST”) against the Liquidator of Veda Biofuel Ltd. (“Corporate Debtor”) vide order dated 07-08-2023, reported at (2023) 496 NCLT. The CGST department had sought the admission of a rejected claim amount of Rs. 8.67 crores.


As per Sub-Regulation 2 of Regulation 16 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016 (“Liquidation Regulations”) states that “A person shall prove its claim for debt or dues to him, including interest, if any, as on the liquidation commencement date.”

The Corporate Debtor, Veda Biofuel Ltd, went into liquidation on 26-05-2020. The CGST Department submitted its claim to the Liquidator, Dr. K.V. Srinivas, to the tune of Rs. 8.7 Crores, who had, after verifying the same, admitted Rs. 3.62 Lakhs and rejected the balance Rs 8.67 crores. This rejection was on the grounds that the demand crystallised after the liquidation commencement date (“LCD”).

CGST Department’s Appeal and Contentions:

The CGST department appealed against the partial rejection of its claim. It contended that the tax demand had arisen from dues prior to the Corporate Debtor going into insolvency.

However, the CGST department failed to provide adequate documentation such as details of tax liability period, Corporate Debtor’s responses, and reasons for delayed audit to prove crystallisation of dues prior to the commencement of CIRP.

NCLT’S Decision and Reasoning

The NCLT referred to the NCLAT judgement in Gurudeo Exports Corporation Pvt Ltd & Ors v. Mr. Akash Singhal Liquidator of Amira Pure Foods Pvt Ltd & Anr. (2023) 324 NCLAT which held that claims must be backed by solid evidence to prove they were due before the liquidation commencement date.

In the absence of proper details regarding tax liability period and Corporate Debtor’s submissions, the NCLT held no finding could be conclusively given on claim’s entitlement.

The appeal was dismissed upholding the Liquidator’s decision, as the CGST department failed to substantiate with evidence that the claim amount was payable before the LCD.


The case highlights the importance of crystallization of debt / dues as on date of commencement of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process/ LCD. Uncrystallized dues as on LCD are to be rejected, even if they seem reasonable otherwise.



Disclaimer: The Opinions expressed in this article are that of the author(s). The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of IBC Laws ( The entire contents of this document have been prepared on the basis of the information existing at the time of the preparation. The author(s) and IBC Laws ( do not take responsibility of the same. Postings on this blog are for informational purposes only. Nothing herein shall be deemed or construed to constitute legal or investment advice. Discussions on, or arising out of this, blog between contributors and other persons shall not create any attorney-client relationship.