I. Case Reference
| Case Citation | : | (2021) ibclaw.in 731 NCLT |
| Case Name | : | Transit Geo System Integrators Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Stahl Tecniks Pvt. Ltd. |
| Operational Creditor | : | Transit Geo System Integrators Pvt. Ltd. |
| Corporate Debtor | : | Stahl Tecniks Pvt. Ltd. |
| Appeal No. | : | (IB)-265/ND/2021 |
| Judgment Date | : | 20-Oct-21 |
| Court/Bench | : | NCLT New Delhi Bench Court-II |
| Act | : | Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code 2016 |
| Member (Judicial) | : | Shri. Abni Ranjan Kumar Sinha |
| Member (Technical) | : | Shri L.N. Gupta |
| Case Status | : | Upheld by NCLAT, reported at (2022) ibclaw.in 126 NCLAT |
II. Brief about the decision
The demand raised by the Sales Tax Department of Rs.9,87,823/- was paid by the Operational Creditor on behalf of the Corporate Debtor. That during the course of hearing it was submitted by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Applicant that the aforesaid debt claimed is an “Operational debt” since the same is arising out of the dues payable to the Sales Tax Department of the State Government. The issue which emerges for our adjudication is – whether the Sales Tax Demand paid by the Operational Creditor can be claimed as reimbursement from a Corporate Debtor as an “Operational Debt” ?
The Adjudicating Authority observed that in the instant case, the Tax Demand has been raised by the Sales Tax Department against the Operational Creditor and not against the Corporate Debtor. That although the definition of the Operational Debt includes the dues arising under any law in force and recoverable by the Central Government or State Government or any local authority, in our considered view, the dues payable to the Government can be claimed by the Government only in the capacity of the Operational Creditor. The payment of Tax Demand made and discharged by the Applicant herein to the State Government will not result in automatic assignment or transfer of such payment/debt to the Corporate Debtor and therefore, Operational Creditor cannot claim the same as reimbursement from the Corporate Debtor as the Operational Debt.
Therefore, the amount shown in part IV of the application as defaulted amount, basing on the Final Notice of Assessment dated 28.03.2017, is neither arising out of provision of goods and services nor is a claim in respect of employment nor it represents the dues payable to the Government, is not an Operational Debt within the meaning of Section 5(21) of the IBC, 2016 and therefore, the applicant is not the operational creditor u/s 5(20) of IBC 2016. Accordingly, the present Application filed under Section 9 of IBC, 2016 is not maintainable and hence, dismissed.(p13-16)
III. Full text of the judgment
Click on below button to search similar judgments:
Follow for daily updates: