PATNA HIGHWAY PROJECTS LIMITED vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT REPRESENTED THROUGH THE JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER CIRCLE 19 2DELHI

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/6137/2024HC DelhiDLHC01024036202402 December 2024Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the tax demand for AY 2019-20 is unrecoverable as it pertains to the period prior to the cut-off date under the Resolution Plan, and it was not disputed that such claims stand extinguished unless specifically included in the plan. The Court relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Ltd. v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. Consequently, the adjustment of the refund of ₹4,50,50,030/- due for AY 2023-24 against this impermissible demand was also held to be impermissible. The Revenue was directed to process the petitioner's refund in accordance with law. The petition was disposed of in these terms.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Patna Highway Projects Limited, filed a writ petition challenging a tax demand of ₹4,50,50,030/- raised by the Income Tax Department for Assessment Year 2019-20. The petitioner contended that this demand was unrecoverable as it pertained to a period prior to a cut-off date under a Resolution Plan. Furthermore, the petitioner claimed that the said refund due for AY 2023-24 had been adjusted against this impermissible demand. The Revenue did not dispute these facts.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the tax demand for AY 2019-20, pertaining to a period prior to the cut-off date under the Resolution Plan, is recoverable by the Revenue? (Question of law) 2. Whether the adjustment of the refund due for AY 2023-24 against the unrecoverable demand for AY 2019-20 is permissible? (Question of mixed law and fact) Assessee's Contentions: - The tax demand for AY 2019-20 is unrecoverable as it relates to the period prior to the cut-off date under the Resolution Plan, unless specifically included in the plan. This is supported by the Supreme Court's decision in Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Ltd. v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. - The adjustment of the refund of ₹4,50,50,030/- due for AY 2023-24 against the aforementioned demand is impermissible. Revenue's Contentions: - The judgment records no specific contentions from the Revenue regarding the recoverability of the demand or the permissibility of the adjustment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6137/2024 & CM. APPLN. 25527/2024

PATNA HIGHWAY PROJECTS LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Gopal Jain, Mr. Mehul Parti & Ms. Harshita Malik, Advocates.

versus

INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT REPRESENTED THROUGH THE JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER CIRCLE 19 2DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC with Mr. Anant Mann, JSC & Mr. Abhishek Anand, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

O R D E R %

02.12.2024 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter-alia, impugning a tax demand dated 11.06.2020, made by the Revenue, in respect of assessment year (AY) 2019-20. 2. Concededly, the impugned demand is unrecoverable as it pertains to the period prior to the cut-off date. It is well settled that all claims for the period prior to the cut-off date under the Resolution Plan, would stand extinguished, unless the same are specifically included in the Resolution Plan. 3. It is also not disputed that the issue stands fully covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Ltd. v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd through 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 06/12/2024 at 12:52:26

Director and Others.: (2021) 9 SCC 657. 4. The petitioner also claims that a sum of ₹4,50,50,030/- was the refund due in respect of the AY 2023-24 and had been adjusted against the said demand. 5. In view of the above, the said adjustment is also impermissible. Consequently, the Revenue is directed to process the petitioner’s refund, in accordance with law. 6. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. All pending applications are also disposed of.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J DECEMBER 2, 2024/at

Click here to check corrigendum, if any 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 06/12/2024 at 12:52:26

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →