INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI vs. EASUN REYROLLE LIMITED, CHENNAI
Facts
The revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2010-11. The assessee submitted that a liquidation order was passed by the NCLT, which was communicated to the revenue, and the revenue had filed a claim for pending proceedings.
Held
The Tribunal held that once a liquidation order is passed, no legal proceedings can be instituted against the corporate debtor. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s order passed after the liquidation was void and non-enforceable.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A)'s order passed after the liquidation of the assessee is valid and enforceable.
Sections Cited
250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 33(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: MS. PADMAVATHY.S & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI
आदेश / O R D E R PER PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: This appeal by the revenue is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short "CIT(A)") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") dated 14.07.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11.
The assessee filed a memo submitting that a liquidation order dated 17.02.2022 has been passed by the Hon'ble National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and that the same has been duly communicated to the revenue on 10.03.2022. The assessee further submits that the revenue submitted a claim with regard to the pending proceedings amounting to Rs.38,32,03,185/- on
ITA No.2632/Chny/2025 Easun Reyrolle Ltd. :- 2 -: 18.03.2022 and the same was admitted vide communication dated 06.05.2022 as a statutory / Government due. The assessee also submits that the revenue is very much in knowledge of the liquidation through various communications stated herein above and that the pending dues have also been admitted. Accordingly, it is submitted that the impugned order passed by the CIT(A) on 14.07.2025 is not valid and therefore the present appeal arising there from does not survive.
We heard the parties and perused the material on record. From the perusal of submissions made by the assessee and the documents submitted we notice that the claims made by the assessee in the above submissions are well substantiated. Further the ld DR fairly conceded the same during the course of hearing. In our considered view once the liquidation order is passed, section 33(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016, specifically mandates that no suit or other legal proceedings shall be instituted by or against the corporate debtor (the assessee here) subject to certain conditions specified therein. Therefore we are of the considered view that the order of CIT(A) passed on 14.07.2025 after the liquidation in the name of the assessee is void and non-enforceable in the eyes of law. Accordingly the present appeal of the revenue arising out of a non-est appellate order is liable to be dismissed.
In result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on 28th day of January, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (मनु कुमार िग#र) (पदमावती यस) (Manu Kumar Giri) (Padmavathy.S) लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य �याियक �याियक सद�य �याियक �याियक सद�य सद�य / Judicial Member सद�य चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 28th January, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S
ITA No.2632/Chny/2025 Easun Reyrolle Ltd. :- 3 -: आदेश क� �ितिल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF
