CONSORTIUM OF MR. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL AND MR. SHARAD AGGARWAL, LEAD BY MR. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT CIRCLE 10(1) & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/15385/2026HC DelhiDLHC01050072202614 October 2026Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE ADITI CHOUDHARY,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the writ petition was misconceived and dismissed it. The Court reasoned that while the Supreme Court in Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited (2021) 9 SCC 657 held that the demand becomes unenforceable upon the approval of a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, an assessment order itself cannot be quashed solely on this ground, especially when it was passed ten years prior. The petitioner had not provided any evidence of recovery actions being taken by the respondents after the resolution plan's approval. However, the Court granted the petitioner liberty to approach the Court again if the respondents initiate any recovery action pursuant to the assessment order dated 30.12.2016. The pending applications were also disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, a consortium of Mr. Vaibhav Aggarwal and Mr. Sharad Aggarwal, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking to quash an assessment order dated 30.12.2016. The basis for this request was the approval of the resolution plan of Haldiram Fincap Private Limited by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 25.08.2026. The petitioner argued that the assessment order, passed ten years prior, had become unenforceable due to the NCLT's approval of the resolution plan. The respondents, the Income Tax Department Circle 10(1) and another, did not appear to have taken any recovery action post the resolution plan approval. The Court noted the absence of any demand notice or enforcement action by the respondents.

What were the issues?

1. Whether an assessment order passed on 30.12.2016 becomes unenforceable and liable to be quashed upon the approval of a resolution plan by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 25.08.2026, in light of the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the Supreme Court's judgment in Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited (2021) 9 SCC 657? (Question of law) Assessee's contention: The assessment order is rendered unenforceable and should be quashed due to the approval of the resolution plan by the NCLT, as per the Supreme Court's ruling. The assessment order, being ten years old, is no longer valid. Revenue's contention: The judgment records no specific contention from the revenue regarding the enforceability of the assessment order post-resolution plan approval or any argument against quashing the order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

None explicitly mentioned in the provided text, other than reference to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010500722026 + W.P.(C) 15385/2026 CM APPL. 72111/2026 CONSORTIUM OF MR. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL AND MR. SHARAD AGGARWAL, LEAD BY MR. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Akshay Allagh, Adv. versus INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT CIRCLE 10(1) & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shlok Chandra, SSC with Ms. Naincy Jain, JSC, Mr. Ujjwal Jain & Mr. Udit Dad, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE ADITI CHOUDHARY O R D E R %

14.10.2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition seeking quashment of the assessment order dated 30.12.2016 on the ground that the resolution plan of Haldiram Fincap Private Limited has been approved by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi (NCLT) vide its order dated 25.08.2026. 2. It is to be noted that by virtue of the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited (2021) 9 SCC 657, the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/10/2026 at 12:15:36

demand becomes unenforceable on approval of the resolution plan. The assessment order that too which was passed ten years ago cannot be quashed as prayed by the petitioner. 3. The petitioner has not placed on record any demand notice or action taken by the respondents for enforcing the recovery pursuant to the assessment order dated 30.12.2016, after approval of the Resolution Plan. 4. The writ petition is thus, misconceived, for which, it is hereby dismissed. 5. The petitioner is, however, given liberty to approach this Court, in case the respondents take any action for recovery of the demand pursuant to the assessment order dated 30.12.2016. 6. Pending application stands disposed of. DINESH MEHTA, J. ADITI CHOUDHARY, J. OCTOBER 14, 2026/sid This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/10/2026 at 12:15:36

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →