ANKUR JAIN, ACIT(OSD), RANGE -10, ITO C.R BUILDING vs. GOODLUCK CARBON PVT. LTD. , NEW DELHI

ITA 3929/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 July 2025AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal and cross-objection could not proceed further at this stage due to the moratorium declared by the National Company Law Tribunal under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Tribunal referred to the decision in Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons (P.) Ltd. vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. (2021) 126 taxamnn.com 132 (SC) and (2024) 464 ITR 133 (Del). The reasoning is that the moratorium prohibits the continuation of pending suits and proceedings against the corporate debtor. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed both the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross-objection at this stage, subject to just exceptions, citing Section 178(vi) of the Act. All other rival pleadings were rendered academic. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The appeal by the Revenue (DCIT) and the cross-objection by the assessee (M/s. Goodluck Carbon Pvt. Ltd.) pertain to assessment year 2014-15. The challenge is against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC dated 31.10.2023, arising from proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. During the hearing, it was revealed that the assessee's financial creditor, Canara Bank, had filed a case (C.P. No. IB 595(ND)/2023) before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), New Delhi. This application was admitted, and a moratorium was declared by the NCLT on 18.10.2024 under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The moratorium imposed several prohibitions, including the continuation of pending suits and execution of judgments against the corporate debtor.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal and cross-objection can proceed further in light of the moratorium declared by the National Company Law Tribunal under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which prohibits the continuation of pending suits and proceedings against the corporate debtor. Assessee's contentions: The assessee's case is that the moratorium declared by the NCLT under Section 14 of the IBC, 2016, prevents the continuation of the present appeal and cross-objection. The assessee relies on the Supreme Court decision in Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons (P.) Ltd. vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. (2021) and a Delhi High Court decision (2024) 464 ITR 133 (Del) to support this contention. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue has not disputed the intervening development of the moratorium being declared by the NCLT. The Revenue's stance is implicitly that the proceedings cannot continue in view of the moratorium.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 14,Section 178(vi)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

Hearing: 26.06.2025Pronounced: 18.07.2025

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.3929/Del/2023
C.O. No.39/Del/2024

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

This Revenue’s appeal as well as assessee’s cross objections

for assessment year 2014-15, arises against the Commissioner of ITA No.3929/Del/ 2023 & C.O. No. 39/Del/2024 Income Tax (Appeals) /National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1057535071(1), dated 31.10.2023 involving proceedings under section 143(3)

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 14

All 685 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →