RELIANCE CAPITAL LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5574/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 September 2026AY 2017-188 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

These appeals by the Revenue and the assessee, Reliance Capital Limited, pertain to Assessment Years 2016-17, 2017-18, and 2018-19. The appeals challenge orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi. Initially, the Revenue sought to withdraw certain appeals (ITA Nos. 6283 & 6490/Mum/2026 for AY 2017-18 and 2018-19) as duplicate filings. For the remaining appeals, the assessee contended that a Resolution Plan approved by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), extinguished all liabilities, including tax dues, not forming part of the plan. The Assessing Officer (AO) had passed orders giving effect to the NCLT order, determining the assessee's total income as NIL for all three assessment years.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal first addressed the Revenue's submission regarding duplicate appeals. It was noted that ITA Nos. 6283 & 6490/Mum/2026 for AY 2017-18 and 2018-19 were indeed duplicate filings. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn. Regarding the substantive issue, the Tribunal perused the orders passed by the Assessing Officer giving effect to the NCLT order for AYs 2016-17, 2017-18, and 2018-19. The AO had determined the assessee's income at NIL for all three years, acknowledging that the Revenue's claims for these years were not part of the approved Resolution Plan and were thus extinguished. The Tribunal found that the AO's determination of NIL income was a direct consequence of the NCLT's order and the provisions of the IBC, as interpreted in the Ghanshyam Mishra case. Therefore, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee became infructuous. The Tribunal dismissed all remaining appeals as infructuous.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeals filed by the Revenue for Assessment Years 2017-18 and 2018-19 (ITA Nos. 6283 & 6490/Mum/2026) are duplicate and should be treated as withdrawn? 2. Whether the Resolution Plan approved by the NCLT under the IBC, 2016, extinguishes all tax liabilities of the assessee for the Assessment Years 2016-17 to 2018-19 that were not part of the approved plan? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the NCLT's order dated 27.02.2024, approving the Resolution Plan, extinguished all liabilities, including tax dues, not included in the plan, citing Section 31 of the IBC and the Supreme Court's decision in Ghanshyam Mishra & Sons Private Limited Vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited. The AO's orders giving effect to the NCLT order, determining NIL income, were presented as evidence. Reliance was placed on a Coordinate Bench decision in Indus General Insurance Company Limited. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through the Ld. DR, conceded that certain appeals were duplicate filings and sought their withdrawal. No specific arguments were recorded regarding the merits of the NCLT's impact on tax liabilities for the remaining appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 31,Section 156A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई पीठें, म ुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BENCH: D BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH KUMAR LODHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA 5563, 5574 & 5542/MUM/2026 निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-2017 to 2018-19) RELIANCE CAPITAL LIMITED DY. COMMISSIONER OF 11TH FLOOR, R-TECH IT PARK, 400063. अपीलधर्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AAACR5054J

ITA 6067, 6489, 6283, 6490&6355/MUM/2026 निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-2017 to 2018-19) ACIT-15(3)(1) RELIANCE CAPITAL LIMITED 4TH 11TH FLOOR, R-TECH IT PARK, अपीलधर्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AAACR5054J

अपीलधर्थी द्वारा/Appellant represented by: Shri Jitendra Sanghavi प्रत्यर्थी द्वारा/Respondent represented by: Shri Sandeep Lakra (CIT-DR)

सुनवाई की तारीख

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 31

All 321 judgments and leading authorities on Section 31 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →