M/S. AMTEK AUTO LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4944/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 September 2019AY 2008-094 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 due to the moratorium declared under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, continuation of pending suits is barred. Therefore, the appeals could not be proceeded with until the insolvency proceedings concluded.

What were the facts?

The assessee and the revenue filed appeals against the CIT(A) orders for assessment years 2006-07 to 2011-12. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) had appointed an Insolvency Resolution Professional for the revival of the company.

What were the issues?

Whether pending appeals before the ITAT can continue when a moratorium has been declared under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 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, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, & SHRI SUCHITRA KAMBLE,

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta-Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goyal-CIT-DR
Hearing: 02/09/2019Pronounced: 04/09/2019
2.

At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, Principal Bench vide CA(AT)(Insolvency) No.219 of 2019 dated 16/08/2019 u/s 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. According to that order, Insolvency Resolution Professional has been appointed for the revival of the company.

The Ld. AR submitted that according to the provisions of Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, a Moratorium had been declared and continuation of any pending any pending suit is barred and, therefore, till the Insolvency proceedings continue, these appeals cannot be proceeded with.

Therefore, in the light of the aforesaid order of the NCLT, all these appeals are dismissed.

3.

The Ld. DR did not contest these facts narrated by the Ld. AR.

4.

We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that according to the provision of Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 the moratorium has been declared and the continuation of any pending suit is barred. Therefore till the insolvency process continues these appeals cannot be proceeded with. Therefore, till the company is revived in terms of the Act any appeal filed by the assessee and the Revenue becomes infructuous. Therefore we dismiss all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the revenue. However, in the interest of justice, we give liberty to the assessee as well as to the revenue to file an application for revival of these appeals as and when the moratorium period is over or revival of the company takes place. In meanwhile, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as by the revenue are dismissed.

5.

In result, all the appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed.

More judgments on Section 14

All 685 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →