VASAN HEALTH CARE PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT,CENTRAL-2, CHENNAI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the NCLT's final order, which waived all tax dues, rendered the appeals moot. The Income Tax Department had already given effect to the NCLT order by reducing the demand to Nil.
What were the facts?
The assessee company was admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the IBC, and a moratorium was declared. The PCIT passed revisionary orders under Section 263 during this moratorium period. Subsequently, the NCLT passed a final order approving the resolution plan, which waived all tax dues.
What were the issues?
Whether revisionary orders passed during a moratorium period under IBC are valid, and the effect of a subsequent NCLT order waiving tax dues on pending appeals.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI JAGADISH
O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the revisionary orders of Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-2, Chennai [hereinafter “PCIT”] u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 24.03.2021, 17.03.21020 & 30.03.2021 for Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13, respectively. , 561 & 562/Chny/2022 :- 2 -:
The Ld. A.R has submitted that the Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench, Chennai (NCLT) vide order dated 03.10.2019 admitted the assessee-company into Corporate Insolvency Resolution process under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter “IBC”) and moratorium was declared u/s. 14 of IBC, 2016. The moratorium has continued till passing the final order on 03.02.2023 by the Hon’ble NCLT . The Ld. A.R has submitted that the order u/s. 263 of the Act was passed during moratorium period and he only wants to press one ground that the Ld. PCIT erred in passing the order u/s. 263 of the Act during moratorium period. The Ld. A.R further submitted that amount approved for statutory liability is only Rs. 1 Crore out of which Rs. 82.18 only comes to Income Tax Department towards the claim and therefore, even if the orders of Ld. PCIT are upheld the demands become infructuous since, the demands arisen out of those years do not form part of resolution plan. In view of the above, a report was called for from the Ld. CIT-DR on the consequence to final order passed by Hon’ble NCLT, Division Bench, Chennai. The Ld. CIT-DR has submitted factual report by the Assessing Officer as under:
“In response to the reference cited above a factual report in the case of M/s.Vasan Health Care Pvt. Ltd. is hereby submitted as below: 2) Total demand as per the claim in form-F submitted to the interim resolution professional is Rs.506.73.13.053/-, out of 561 & 562/Chny/2022 :- 3 -: which an amount of Rs.84,15,847/- was admitted in accordance with the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the balance of Rs. 505.88.97.206/- was not admitted. Out of the amount not admitted, an amount of Rs.162,33,37,235/- was withdrawn by the income tax department vide their revision order u/s 154 of the Income tax Act, 1961 dated 31/03 /2019 for the AY 2015- 16. 3). The Department has not filed any appeal against the aforesaid NCLT-order till date. 4) The Hon’ble NCIT, Division Bench, Chennai passed a final order vide IA(IBC)288(CHE) /2022 in CA/ 1/IB/2017 dated 03.02.2023. As per serial No. 22 (page no. 39) of Schedule I - Relinquishment/waiver of liabilities and approval of the said order, the Hon'ble NCLT held that: "To provide relief to the Company from all past litigations up to the date of implementation of this resolution Plan pending at different levels and provide waiver from all tax dues including interest, penalty & prosecution for all historic disclosed tax dues and undisclosed tax dues. All pending notices, assessment order, pending summons and pending assessments (including those set out in the table below) towards the company would be treated as closed. Further no action would d be taken for any action/ transaction carried out before the Implementation date. It is clarified that no tax (including interest & penalty) would be paid for any liability or claim raised or non- compliance for period up to the Implementation date. Further, any re-assessment, revision or other proceedings under. the provisions of the Income Tax Act would be deemed to be barred in relation to any period prior to the Implementation Date by virtue of the the NCLT approving this Resolution Plan and the company or the Resolution Applicant shall at no point of time be directly or indirectly held responsible or liable in relation thereto." In view of the above, since no amount of funds have been earmarked for the dues under direct taxes, the entire demand for all the assessment years till AY 2022-23 were reduced to NIL by passing orders u/s 156A of the I.T. Act, 1961.”
We have taken on record the factual report of the A.O, whereby the entire demand for all the A.Ys till A.Y 2022-23 has been reduced to Nil by passing order u/s. 156A of the Act. As per Section 31 of IBC, 561 & 562/Chny/2022 :- 4 -:
2016, resolution plan as approved by adjudicating authority shall be binding on the corporate board and its employees, Members, creditors, guarantor and other stakeholders involved in the resolution plan. The department has already given effect to Hon’ble NCLT order reducing demand to Nil. As there is no remaining cause for grievance, the appeals have become moot and therefore dismissed.
In the result, all the three appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed.
Order pronounced on 12th June, 2024. (महावीर िसंह) (जगदीश) (Jagadish) (Mahavir Singh) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य /Accountant Member उपा" / Vice President सद"य सद"य चे"ई/Chennai, "दनांक/Dated: 12th June, 2024. EDN/-
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026