DCIT, CIRCLE-27(1), NEW DELHI vs. UM GREEN LIGHTING P.LTD, NEW DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that due to the moratorium declared by the NCLT under Section 14 of the IBC, all proceedings against the assessee, including the present appeal, cannot continue. This is due to the overriding effect of the IBC over other laws.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee company was undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) had declared a moratorium in the case of the assessee.
What were the issues?
Whether proceedings before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can continue against a company undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) and subject to a moratorium declared by the NCLT.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- Pr. CIT v. Monnet Ispat & Energy Ltd.34 citing107 Taxmann.com 481 · 2019 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G” DELHI
Before: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA
The captioned appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IX, New Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) dated 10.12.2018 arising from the assessment order dated 07.12.2017 passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2015-16.
When the matter was called for hearing, the Resolution Professional (RP) appearing on behalf of the assessee pointed out that the assessee has been subjected to proceedings under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) and Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) has been initiated against the assessee by the operational creditors. It was pointed out that in terms of order dated 13.12.2021 delivered by National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench (NCLT) a moratorium has been declared in the case of the assessee with reference to provisions of Section 14 of the Insolvency Code. The ld. RP appearing for the assessee also pointed out as a necessary consequence of the declaration of moratorium in terms of Section 14 of the Code, several prohibitions have been imposed which inter alia includes continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the assessee including execution of any judgment, decree or order by any Court of Law, Tribunal, Arbitration Penal or Authority. The ld. RP thus submitted that in view of prohibitions imposed by the NCLT order which has the overriding effect on the Tribunal, the present proceedings by the Revenue against the assessee cannot continue during the moratorium period.
The Ld. Sr.DR on its part submitted that the present appeal in narrated circumstances cannot be pursued in view of the overriding provisions of insolvency code but however, prayed for liberty to revive the captioned appeal as and when the moratorium period is over or revival of company takes place.
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 provision of the code, the assessee is estopped to pursue the captioned appeal.
Thus, in view of the moratorium declared by NCLT, all proceedings in the court of law, Tribunal etc. cannot continue in view of the overriding provisions of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code as recognized in Section 178(6) of the Act. That being the position, no useful purpose is going to be served in continuing the present proceedings. Therefore, this appeal needs to be consigned to the records.
For such reasons, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with a liberty to the Revenue to seek remedial measures in accordance with law as and when the moratorium period is over or order of the NCLT is modified or revival of the assessee company takes place or where it is otherwise necessary to do so in the interest of the parties.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed in limine for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 23.05.2023.
More judgments on Section 14
- Infra Developers, Shivpuri vs Income Tax Officer, AshoknagarITA 454/AGR/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Shri Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, SuratWTA 2/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Shri Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, SuratWTA 1/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
- Narayan Industries Global Limited, New Delhi vs DCIT Circle 16(1), DelhiITA 8422/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Manpreet Estates LLP, Mumbai vs ACIT, Central Circle 8(3), MumbaiITA 4386/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed11 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026