Whether set-off/adjustment of demand with refund by Income Tax Dept. during the intervening period when CIRP timeline period has expired but Liquidation Order u/s 33 of IBC has not yet been passed, amounted to violation of Moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC? – Mr. Devarajan Raman Liquidator of Kotak Urja Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Principal Commissioner Income Tax and Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi

This judgment answered the following issues: (i) Can Income Tax Dept. set-off/adjust tax dues with refund during the intervening period when CIRP timeline period had expired but the liquidation order had not yet been passed by the Adjudicating Authority? (ii) Can a Secured Creditor realise secured assets in terms of Section 52 of the IBC after expiry of CIRP period under Section 12 of the IBC and before liquidation order under Section 33 is passed? (iii) Is Income Tax Department being a Government Authority a secured creditor and entitled to realise security interest?

Related Posts:

If any Public depositor applies showing due of the debt claiming itself as operational creditor and the Resolution Professional or the Tribunal do not accept the claim on the ground that they are not financial creditor, we allow the appellant to raise the question before the Tribunal and if any adverse decision is given by the Tribunal, it will be open to the appellant to raise the issue before NCLAT- Hind Motors India Ltd. Vs. Adjudicating Authority NCLT, Chandigarh – NCLAT New Delhi

IBC-Case Laws-NCLAT
Scroll to Top