15/04/2024

Whether an application under Section 9 of IBC can survive in so far as the same relates to the interest portion of the claim when the entire principal amount has been paid? – Zenith Metalik Alloys Ltd. Vs. LAMCO Industries Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Hyderabad Bench

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to […]

Whether an application under Section 9 of IBC can survive in so far as the same relates to the interest portion of the claim when the entire principal amount has been paid? – Zenith Metalik Alloys Ltd. Vs. LAMCO Industries Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Hyderabad Bench Read Post »

Any proceedings for assessment, reassessment or re-computation initiated in terms of the faceless assessment procedure under Section 144B of Income Tax Act, 1961, after approval of Resolution Plan is contrary to the Clean Slate theory under IBC – M Tech Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi and Anr. – Delhi High Court

Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that:

(i) The Section 144B of the Income Tax, 1961 power entails proceedings for assessment, reassessment or re-computation being initiated in terms of the faceless procedure of assessment as prescribed therein. Any effort to assess, reassess or re-compute could tend to lean towards a re-computation of liabilities which otherwise stands freezed by virtue of the Resolution Plan having been approved. Such an action or recourse would clearly be barred by Section 31 of the IBC.
(ii) A Section 144B action is what the Supreme Court frowned upon and chose to describe as the “hydra head ” and thus being contrary to the clean slate principle which the IBC advocates.
(iii) Referring Dishnet Wireless Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) (2022) ibclaw.in 141 HC held that the IBC does not erect different levels of protection or insulation dependent upon whether corporate insolvency had been initiated voluntarily or on the basis of a petition referable to Section 7 of the IBC.
(iv) The Tax Authorities cannot sustain the invocation of Section 144B based on their own failure to lodge a claim within the time stipulated.

Any proceedings for assessment, reassessment or re-computation initiated in terms of the faceless assessment procedure under Section 144B of Income Tax Act, 1961, after approval of Resolution Plan is contrary to the Clean Slate theory under IBC – M Tech Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi and Anr. – Delhi High Court Read Post »

Whether Successful Auction Purchaser is entitled interest on sale consideration, in case delay in issuance of Sale Certificate by Liquidator – Gokul Agro Resources Ltd. Vs. Mr. Supriyo Kumar Chaudhuri Liquidator of JVL Agro Industries Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

Hon’ble NCLAT held that the present is a case where assets have been handed over to the Appellant. Present is not a case where due to any reason, the Appellant is entitled for refund of sale consideration. In event the Appellant may be entitled for refund of sale consideration the prayer for refund of the sale consideration along with interest could have been considered. But, here the sale consideration, which was deposited and which has earned interest is in lieu of the assets, which have been ultimately sold to the Appellant and handed over to him. There is no merit in the submission of the Appellant that Liquidator should be directed to make payment of interest on the sale consideration, which was deposited by the Appellant due to delay in handing over of assets to the Appellant, which assets could not be handed over earlier due to restraint order of the Adjudicating Authority dated 04.04.2022, which could be vacated only on 01.06.2023.

Whether Successful Auction Purchaser is entitled interest on sale consideration, in case delay in issuance of Sale Certificate by Liquidator – Gokul Agro Resources Ltd. Vs. Mr. Supriyo Kumar Chaudhuri Liquidator of JVL Agro Industries Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

In Personal Guarantor Insolvency, objection regarding the maintainability to Resolution Professional can be raised the time of hearing of the application under Section 100 of the Code and not at the time of appointment of the RP under Section 95 of IBC – Vikas Shambhukumar Kasliwa Vs. Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. and Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi

Learned Counsel for the Appellant challenging the order submits that the loan was assigned but assignee has not come on the record. He has further raised certain other issues. In view of the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dilip B. Jiwrajka Vs. Union of India & Ors., it is well settled that no adjudicatory issue can be raised at the time of appointment of the RP under Section 95 and all issues can be looked into and raised when the application come for admission or rejection under Section 100.

In Personal Guarantor Insolvency, objection regarding the maintainability to Resolution Professional can be raised the time of hearing of the application under Section 100 of the Code and not at the time of appointment of the RP under Section 95 of IBC – Vikas Shambhukumar Kasliwa Vs. Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. and Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Scroll to Top