Case Law Details
Harish Chander Arora Liquidator of Rathi Super Steel Ltd Vs PCIT (NCLAT Delhi)
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) Delhi dismissed the appeal by Harish Chander Arora, Liquidator of Rathi Super Steel Ltd, against the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT). The appeal contested an NCLT order rejecting the liquidator’s claim for the return of ₹20,50,000 adjusted by the Income Tax Department against outstanding tax demand for AY 2011-12. The liquidator argued that the amount, seized in 2012 and adjusted on March 31, 2019, constituted an asset of the Corporate Debtor (CD) and should have been claimed through the insolvency resolution process post-CIRP initiation on June 12, 2019.
NCLAT held that since the amount was seized and adjusted by the department prior to the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), it did not form part of the CD’s assets under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The Tribunal ruled that the Department’s action complied with existing rules and evidence, including the tax accounting records, and the appeal lacked merit. The decision reinforces the principle that adjustments made before CIRP initiation are outside the scope of insolvency proceedings.
FULL TEXT OF THE NCLAT JUDGMENT/ORDER
This appeal is directed against the order dated 13.09.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, Special Bench by which an application filed by the Liquidator bearing I.A No. 4457 of 2021 under Section 60(5)(c) of the Code for a direction to the Respondent herein to return the amount of Rs. 20,50,000/- in the account of the Corporate Debtor viz. Rathi Super Steel Limited (in Liquidation) on the ground that the said amount belongs to the CD and could not have been adjusted by the Respondent against the outstanding demand raised against the CD for the AY 2011 – 12 has been dismissed.
2. The Tribunal has dismissed the application, inter alia, on the ground that the amount was seized in the year 2012 by the Department. The Corporate Debtor was selected for scrutiny u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act for A.Y. 2011-12 and the assessment was completed on 31.12.2018 resulting into a demand of Rs. 37506040 /-. The Assessee i.e. Corporate Debtor filed an appeal before CIT(A) against the outstanding demand but as per the instructions of the Board, the Assessee was liable to pay 20% of the outstanding amount i.e. 7501208/-. The said amount stated to have been adjusted by the Respondent on 31.03.2019. In this regard, he has produced an online tax accounting system of the department of income tax which indicated that the amount in question pertaining to the year 2011-12 has been adjusted vide challan serial no. 86 on 31.03.2019 whereas CIRP in this case was initiated on 12.06.2019. The said OLTAS payment and challan status for tax payer are reproduced as under:-
–
3. The only argument raised by the Appellant is that the amount could not have been adjusted by the Department even if it has been seized for the year 2011-12 after the initiation of the CIRP because Respondent has to file a claim in terms of the Code either to the IRP or to the Liquidator as the case may be.
4. However, since the amount in question having been seized in the year 2011-12 and has already been adjusted on 31.03.2019 as per the evidence produced, indicated herein above, much prior to the initiation of CIRP much less the liquidation which took place much later thereof, therefore, the argument raised by the Appellant has no legs to stand.
5. Thus, in such circumstances, we do not find any error in the impugned order and hence, the present appeal is found without any merit and the same is hereby dismissed. Applications, if any, are hereby closed. No costs.
Author Bio
