SEJAL GLASS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 13(2)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2664/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 July 2022AY 2013-143 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that as per Section 14 of the IBC, no proceedings can be continued against a corporate debtor during the moratorium period. Therefore, continuing the appeal would be a continuation of proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee company was referred to Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the IBC, 2016. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) had passed an order in this regard.

What were the issues?

Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can continue proceedings against a company undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under the IBC, 2016.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14 of IBC, 2016

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri. Saurabh Mohite, AR
For Respondent: Shri. Hoshang.B.Irani-DR
Hearing: 05.07.2022Pronounced: 06.07.2022

Date of Hearing 05.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement 06.07.2022 आदेश / O R D E R

PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM:

1.

This is the appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Mumbai Passed u/sec143(3) and 250 of the Act.

ITA.No2664/Mum/2018, Sejal Glass v. DCIT

2.

At the time of hearing, the Ld. DR has brought to the knowledge of the bench that, the assessee has been referred to the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process as per IBC-2016 Laws. Further the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai dated 26.03.2021 was brought on record.

3.

We found as per the provisions of Sec.14 of IBC- 2016 till the conclusion of proceedings under IBC-2016 no suit or proceedings can be continued against the corporate debtor. Considering the facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that there is no point in proceeding with the appeal filed by the assesse and also keeping the appeal pending is also a continuation of proceedings.

4.

Accordingly, we considering the provisions of section14 of IBC-2016 Laws and the order of the NCLT dismiss the appeal filed by the Assessee. Further we grant the liberty to the appellant/assessee to move an application to recall the present order after the ITA.No2664/Mum/2018, Sejal Glass v. DCIT moratorium is over as per the provisions of IBC-2016 laws.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →