DCIT-8(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHIRDI INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4096/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 July 2022AY 2007-083 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that no proceedings can continue against the corporate debtor during the insolvency resolution process. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition made by the AO. The assessee, Shirdi Industries Ltd., is undergoing corporate insolvency resolution process under the IBC 2016.

What were the issues?

Whether proceedings can continue against a corporate debtor undergoing insolvency resolution process under IBC 2016.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Mahaveer Jain, AR
For Respondent: Shri Jasbir S. Chouhan, CIT DR
Hearing: 13.07.2022Pronounced: 27.07.2022
1.

This appeal is filed by Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 8(2)(1), Mumbai, (the learned Assessing Officer) against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)–14, Mumbai, [the learned CIT(A)] dated 10th March, 2017 for A.Y. 2007–08 raising following grounds of appeal:-

“(1) The Learned CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in justifying the fact that the investing company invested in the share premium of the company without making any enquiry regarding profit of the company, earnings per share, history of dividend

(ii) The Learned CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting the addition made by the AO when the assessee nor the investor has provided the details which proves the credit worthiness and the same is not commensurate to have afforded to make such huge investment to share premium of the assessee company.

2. The Ld.CIT(A)'s order is contrary to law and facts and deserves to be set aside and A.O.'s order may be restored.”

2.

At the time of hearing, the advocate of the assessee submitted a letter wherein the order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) dated 7th May, 2018 is filed, wherein assessee is a corporate debtor and corporate insolvency resolution process under IBC 2016 is continuing. In terms of Section 14 of IBC 2016, no proceedings can continue against the corporate debtor.

3.

The learned Departmental Representative pointed out our attention that letter dated 17th May, 2021 states these facts.

4.

We find that as the corporate insolvency resolution process is continuing in case of the above assessee the learned Assessing Officer cannot continue to pursue this appeal. Accordingly, in terms of Section 14 of IBC 2016, we dismiss the appeal of the learned Assessing Officer

5.

In the result, the appeal of the learned Assessing Officer is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27.07.2022.

More judgments on Section 14

All 685 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →