ALCOCK ASHDOWN (GUJ) LTD vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
TAXAP/803/2009HC GujaratGJHC24040916200911 July 2022Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH SHASTRI2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court decided to dispose of the appeal. The court noted that the appellant's counsel had filed a note for withdrawal of appearance, and the appellant had been intimated of the hearing but failed to appear. The court also took into consideration the order dated March 8, 2021, passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which declared a moratorium and prohibited the continuation of pending suits or proceedings. Given the appellant's non-representation and the statutory bar imposed by the NCLT order, the court found no purpose in keeping the appeal pending. Therefore, the appeal was disposed of.

What were the facts?

The appeal, filed in 2009, was listed for hearing. The appellant's counsel filed a note seeking withdrawal of appearance, stating that the senior counsel who was instructed had expired, and the appellant intended to engage new counsel. The appellant was duly intimated of the hearing. Despite the matter being called out, there was no representation from the appellant. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) had previously passed an order on March 8, 2021, declaring a moratorium under Section 13(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and issuing directions under Section 14, which prohibited the continuation of pending suits or proceedings due to a statutory bar.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the appellant's non-representation and the counsel's withdrawal of appearance. (Question of procedure) 2. Whether the moratorium declared by the National Company Law Tribunal under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, prohibits the continuation of the present appeal. (Question of law) Assessee's Contentions: The appellant's counsel sought withdrawal of appearance, indicating the appellant's intention to engage new counsel due to the demise of the previously instructed senior counsel. The appellant was intimated of the hearing. Revenue's Contentions: No specific contentions are recorded for the revenue in the judgment. However, the court noted the appellant's non-representation and the statutory bar imposed by the NCLT order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 13(1)(a),Section 14

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/TAXAP/803/2009 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 803 of 2009 ================================================== ALCOCK ASHDOWN (GUJ) LTD Versus JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ================================================== Appearance: MR MANISH J SHAH(1320) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 M R BHATT & CO.(5953) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI

Date : 11/07/2022 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has filed a note in the Registry for withdrawal of appearance on the ground that appellant has been intimated of engaging any other counsel since Mr. J.P. Shah, learned Senior Counsel who had been instructed, has expired and they can make alternate arrangement to engage any other counsel. The said communication has been forwarded by advocate on record Mr.Manish J. Shah. The photocopy of the track consignment obtained from the web portal of postal authority indicating the notice of intimation forwarded to the appellant – assessee Page 1 of 2

C/TAXAP/803/2009 ORDER DATED: 11/07/2022 having been delivered and there being no representation on behalf of the appellant even after having been called out in the open court, we are of the opinion that keeping the present appeal pending would not serve any purpose particularly, when the appeal is of the year 2009 and National Company Law Tribunal by order passed on 8.3.2021 while declaring moratorium under Section 13(1)(a) of the I.B. Code has issued direction under Section 14 whereunder continuation of pending suits or proceedings has been prohibited in view of statutory bar. Hence, placing the same on record, present appeal stands disposed of. (ARAVIND KUMAR,CJ) (ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J) Bharat Page 2 of 2

More judgments on Section 14

All 685 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →