Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 arose from an order under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee did not appear for the hearing, and the case was proceeded ex-parte. It was noted that the assessee was already undergoing insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Held
The Tribunal noted that a coordinate bench had previously dismissed similar appeals filed by the Revenue concerning the same assessee for earlier assessment years, as they were deemed not maintainable due to the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). Following this precedent and the fact that the assessee was also undergoing insolvency proceedings, the present appeal was dismissed.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal is maintainable when the assessee is undergoing insolvency proceedings and did not appear for the hearing.
Sections Cited
143(3), 9
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
Date of hearing 08.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 08.07.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], New Delhi’s order dated 06.02.2025 passed in case no. CIT(A), Delhi-24/10004/2020-21, involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It emerges from a perusal of the tribunal’s records that the assessee/appellant is already being proceeded u/s 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 as per the learned coordinate bench’s order in department’s appeal to 7829/Del/2018 for assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2014- 15, dated 16.12.2021, reading as under: “4. On careful consideration it is found that the above company has been referred for initiation of corporate insolvency process in terms of Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The National Company Law Tribunal, Special Bench, New Delhi in IB 2582(ND)–2019 vide order dated 17th December, 2019 has referred this company for insolvency proceedings. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Gupta, has also been appointed as IRP. The present Departmental appeals are found to be filed by Shri Karthik Dasari in the capacity of the ACIT. The moment IRP is appointed, the board of the company is super- ceded. Therefore, the appeals filed by the ACIT are not maintainable. In view of this, we dismiss all the three appeals filed by the Revenue with a liberty that as soon as the committee of creditors is being decided to pursue this matter then the IRP should file these appeals. If it is so decided, then we give liberty to the IRP either to make an application for recall of this order by filing corrected Form No. 36 or to file the fresh appeals with the condonation of delay request. Accordingly, all the three appeals filed by the Department are dismissed.”
That being the case, the assessee’s instant appeal is hereby rejected in very terms subject to all just exceptions.