CBS HOLDING (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2476/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 March 2024AY 2010-11Bench: SHRI KUL BHARAT (Judicial Member), SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA (Accountant Member)2 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, considering the statutory provisions of the IBC, including Section 238, and a Supreme Court precedent (Pr. CIT Vs. Monnet Ispat and Energy Limited), ruled that the assessee is estopped from pursuing the appeals during the moratorium. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed, granting the assessee liberty to seek remedial measures and revival once the moratorium period concludes.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by CBS Holdings (P) Ltd. against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2010-11, stemming from an assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. During the hearing, it was brought to the tribunal's attention that the assessee is undergoing proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and a moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC has been granted by the NCLT, prohibiting all proceedings against the company.

What were the issues?

Can an appeal proceed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal when the appellant-assessee is subject to a moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Income Tax Act, 1961: Section 143(3), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 14, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 31(1), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 33, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 238

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B” DELHI

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Kumar for Shri Nikhil Sachdeva, Chartered
For Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr.DR

The captioned appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, New Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) dated 31.03.2015 arising from the assessment order dated 28.03.2013 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2010-11.

2.

When the matter was called for hearing, it was pointed out on behalf of assessee that proceedings under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) are in continuation against the assessee before National Company Law Tribunal New Delhi Bench and moratorium as per the provisions of Section 14 of the IBC has been granted. A copy of the order of NCLT granting moratorium (para 12) dated 16.01.2024 pursuant to proceedings initiated under IBC Code 2016 was placed on record. It was further pointed out that as per the order of the NCLT, moratorium under Section 14 of IBC 2016 shall have effect from 16.01.2024 till the completion of CIRP or until approval of resolution plan by adjudicating authority under Section 31(1) of IBC or until order of liquidation of the assessee company under Section 33 of IBC as a case may be. It has been further ordered that pending suits or proceedings against the assessee company including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any Court of law, Tribunal, arbitration penal or other authority, etc. is prohibited. It was thus urged that the appeals of the assessee be kept in abeyance or in the alternative where the Tribunal disposes these appeals a liberty be granted to assessee to seek revival of these appeals after lifting of moratorium.

4.

The Ld. DR for the Revenue did not express any objection to such plea of the assessee.

5.

In the light of statutory provision and in the light of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Monnet Ispat and Energy Limited (2019) 107 taxmann.com 481 and also in the light of the overriding nature of provisions of the Code in terms of section 238 of the Act, the assessee is estopped to pursue the captioned appeals.

6.

For such reasons, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed with a liberty to the assessee to seek remedial measures in accordance with law as and when the moratorium period is over or revival of the assessee company takes place.

7.

In the result, the captioned appeals of the assessee stand dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/03/2024

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →