In the present case, one M/s. Edelweiss Asset reconstruction Company Ltd filed an application unser section 7 of the IBC to initiate CIR process against the Petitioner.The said application was admitted by NCLT vide order dated 05.04.2017. pursuant to the admission, RP made public announcement under regulation 6 of the CIRP Regulations, 2016 inviting claims from the creditors along with the proof relating thereto. In response to this, the Deputy Commissioner of Income tax (TDS), submitted a claim of Rs. 5023770/-According to the petitoner, this was the only claim received from the Income Tax Department pursuant to the public announcement. Dalmiya Cement (Bharat) Limited submitted a Resolution plan on 28.12.2017. The said Plan was approved subject to certain modifications vide order dated 03.06.2019 and 22.07.2019. The resolution Plan and the orders of the NCLT were upheld by NCLAT by an order dated 24.01.2020.

The petitioner company had filed its return of income for the A. Y. 2014-15 declaring loss. the Income Tax Authorities passed notice under section 143(3) read with section 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961, selecting the petitioner company for Scrutiny Assessment, seeking to re-open the concluded assessment of the petitioner company for the A.Y. 2014-15.The petitoner company has challenged on the legality and validity of the notice passed by the Income Tax Authorities on the ground that it is contrary to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ghanshyam Mishra & Sons Pvt Ltd Vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd.

Question: whether the Income Tax Department can issue notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961, calling upon it to submit Return of Income in the prescribed form for the A.Y. falling prior to the date of the approval of the Resolution Plan?

The Hon’ble high Court citing the above mentioned case held that a claim in respect of the dues arising under any law for the time being in force, including claims under Income tax Acr, 1961, which is payable to the Central Government and state government would come within the ambit of operational Creditors.The contention of the Court is that the calim of operational creditor wouls also include the claim of statutory authority pursuant to the imposition by an statute. The Hon’ble High Court concluded that all such claims which are not a part of the Resolution plan , on the date of the approval of the Reslution plan shall stand extinguished and no person shall be entitled to initiate proceedings in respect thereto, for a claim which is not the part of Resolution plan.the expression “no person” would include the proceedings in the nature of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Branch:

Link: https://ibclaw.in/murli-industries-ltd-vs-assistant-commissioner-of-income-tax-high-court-of-bombay/