Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
$-40 to 60 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI V, + ITA Nos. 533/2017, 534/2017, 535/2017. 536/2017. 537/2017. 538/2017. 539/2017. 540/2017. 541/2017. 542/2017. 543/2017. 544/2017. 545/2017. 546/2017. 5472017. 548/2017. 549/2017. 550/2017. 551/2017. 552/2017 & 554/2017 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, NEW DELHI Appellant Through: Mr. Asheesh Jain, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Vikrant A. Maheshwari, Advocate. versus MONNETISPAT & ENERGY LTD. Respondent Through: Ms. Anne Mathew, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH ORDER % 04.09.2017 1. The Court has heard the learned counsel for both parties. The provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('Code') and, in particular. Section 14 thereofhas been perused. 2. It appears to the Court that Section 238 ofthe Code is categorical that the Code will apply, notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in" any other law for the time being in force. Section 14(l)(a) of the Code states, inter alia, that on the 'insolvency commencement date' the ITA No. 533/2017 &connectedmatters Page1of3 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified
Adjudicating Authority (AA) shall by order declare moratorium for prohibiting "the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority." That the Code will prevail over all other statutes inconsistent therewith has been explained in the recent decision dated 31®^ August, 2017 of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.8337-8338/2017 {M/s. Innoventive Industries Ltd. v. ICICIBank). 3. In the instant case, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) [which by virtue ofSection 5 (1) ofthe Code is the AA] has by its order dated 18^ July 2017 admitted the petition under Section 7 of the Code filed by the State Bank of India against the Respondent Assessee and prohibited, inter alia, "the institution of suits or continuation ofpending suits or proceedings" against the Respondent. This would include the present appeal by the Income Tax Department ('Department') against the order ofthe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('ITAT') in respect ofthe tax liability ofthe Respondent- Assessee. 4. Mr. Asheesh Jain, learned Senior Standing counsel for the Revenue, points out that unlike some of the earlier insolvency statutes the Code does not envisage permission being sought from the NCLT for continuation ofthe continuation ofpending proceedings against the Respondent in other fora. In the order dated 18^*^ July 2017 is clear that the moratorium continues "till the completion of the corporate insolvency resolution process or until this Bench approves the resolution plan under sub-Section (1) of Section 31 or passes an order for liquidation of corporate debtor under Section 33, as the ITA No. 533/2017 & connected matters Page 2 of3
case may be." 5. Consequently, these appeals are disposed of with liberty to the Appellant- Department to revive them subject to the further orders ofthe NCLT. 6. Copy ofthe order be given dasti under the signature ofthe Court Master. SEPTEMBER 04,2017 dk ITA No. 533/2017 & connected matters S. MURAtlDHAR, J. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. Page 3 of3