DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. KROSSLINK INFRASTRURCTURE LTD , MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2743/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 June 2024AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (Judicial Member), SHRI RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)1 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?

As per Section 14 of IBC-2016, no proceedings can continue against a corporate debtor during the CIRP. Therefore, it is not appropriate to proceed with the revenue's appeal, as keeping it pending also constitutes a continuation of proceedings.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal against an order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee was undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) as per IBC-2016. An order from the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) was brought on record.

What were the issues?

Whether the revenue's appeal can be continued against a corporate debtor undergoing CIRP under IBC-2016.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI RENU JAUHRI

Hearing: 27.06.2024Pronounced: 27.06.2024

ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: “ The revenue has filed the appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)(CIT(A), Mumbai passed u/sec 250 of the Act.

2.

At the time of hearing, the Ld. DR has mentioned that, the assessee has been referred to the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) as per IBC-2016 Laws. Further the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal

(A.Y.2014-15 Krosslink Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai (NCLT), Mumbai dated 02.11.2023 was brought on record, filed by the Resolution Professional (RP) letter dated 2-05- 2024.

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 revenue 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 revenue. Further we grant the liberty to the appellant/revenue to move an application to recall the present order after the moratorium is over as per the provisions of IBC-2016 laws.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 27.06.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →