KIFS FINSTOCK LIMITED,THANE vs. ASSISTANT COMMSIONER CIRCLE 16(1), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that while the moratorium bars proceedings against the corporate debtor, it does not prevent the company itself from initiating actions. The Tribunal modified the CIT(A)'s finding, allowing for the revival of the appeal after the moratorium period expires.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) as non-maintainable due to a moratorium issued by the NCLT. The NCLT order prohibited the continuation of proceedings against the corporate debtor.
What were the issues?
Whether a moratorium under the IBC prevents the continuation of tax appeals against a corporate debtor, and if the appeal can be revived after the moratorium period.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA
स िवाई की िारीख / Date of Hearing 05.06.2025 घोर्णा की िारीख/Date of Pronouncement 05.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA [A.M.]:- This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 12.12.2024 by NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] pertaining to Assessment Year [AY] 2018-19.
The grievance of the assessee reads as under: “1. The Ld. CIT Appeals has erred in dismissing as non-maintainable as the assessee was out of CIRP a year before passing the order and same was communicated to the Ld CIT Appeals.
2. The Ld. CIT Appeals has erred by not appreciating that the section 14 of IBC puts temporary bar on continuation of proceedings and it does not put permanent embargo by abating the proceedings. 3.The Ld. CIT Appeals has erred by not appreciating that the section 14 of IBC bars. the continuation of proceedings against the corporate debtor but does not put any bar when proceedings, suit etc. is instituted by company itself. 4. The Ld CIT Appeals has erred by not deleting the addition of Rs 344,17,27,462/-made u/s 68 in respect of share capital issued. 5. The LD CIT Appeals has erred by not granting the opportunity through video conferencing before disposal of the matter & thereby principles of natural justice was violated.”
None appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of notice. Therefore, we decided to proceed exparte.
The entire quarrel revolves around the dismissal of the appeal for the reasons that the National Company Law Tribunal [NCLT] has issued a moratorium vide its order dated 03.03.2023, by which the NCLT has appointed Shri Sushil Kumar Agarwal as an insolvency professional. The NCLT inter alia held that “it prohibits the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor, including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration, penal or other authority.” 5. In light of the above, the CIT(A) held the appeal as non-maintainable. We are of the considered view that a liberty should be given to the assessee for revival of the appeal once the moratorium period expires. Therefore, modifying A.Y. 2018-19 KIFS Finstock Ltd. the findings of the CIT(A), we give liberty to the assessee for revival of the appeal once the final order/outcome of the NCLT comes. 6. With this modification, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on .2025.
More judgments on Section 14
- Infra Developers, Shivpuri vs Income Tax Officer, AshoknagarITA 454/AGR/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Shri Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, SuratWTA 2/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Shri Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, SuratWTA 1/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
- Narayan Industries Global Limited, New Delhi vs DCIT Circle 16(1), DelhiITA 8422/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Manpreet Estates LLP, Mumbai vs ACIT, Central Circle 8(3), MumbaiITA 4386/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed11 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sahoo Supply Agency,Balasore vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New DelhiOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Gopal Aromatic PVT. LTD., Cuttack vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Nourangi Paints vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026