Income Tax Demands After Resolution Plan Approval Is Invalid: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has declared the income tax demands raised after the approval of resolution plan (RP) by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) is invalid.

The bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has observed that the additional demands made by the income tax department in respect of the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14 will operate as roadblocks in implementing the approved Resolution Plan, and appellants will not be able to restart the operations of the Corporate Debtor (CD) on a clean slate.

The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated concerning the corporate debtor M/s. Tehri Iron and Steel Casting Ltd. (CD). The appellants are the Joint Resolution Applicants. They submitted a Resolution Plan dated 21stJanuary 2019. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), approved the Resolution Plan submitted by the appellants.

The Resolution Plan had referred to the liability of Rs.16,85,79,469 of the Income Tax Department for the assessment year 2014-15 based on the demand dated 18th December 2017 which was rectified under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 

The liability was shown in the Resolution Plan under the heading “Contingent liabilities”. After the approval of the Resolution Plan, the first respondent issued demand notices dated 26th December 2019 and 28th December 2019 under the IT Act concerning assessment years 2012- 13 and 2013-14, respectively, in respect of the CD. 

However, no claim about the demands for the two assessment years was submitted before the Resolution Professional. The Monitoring Professional, addressed a letter to the income tax department, contending that the demands for the two aforesaid assessment years were unsustainable in law. 

As the income tax department issued a letter asserting the demands, the Monitoring Professional applied to the NCLT for declaring that the demands made by the  income tax department pertaining to assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14 were invalid. 

It was urged that the demands were invalid as no claim in respect thereof was made before the Resolution Professional until the Resolution Plan was approved by the order dated 21st May 2019. By the order dated 17th September 2020, the NCLT dismissed the application, holding it to be frivolous. 

The costs of Rs.1 lakh were made payable by the appellants and the second respondent. Being aggrieved by the said order, an appeal under Section 61 of the IB Code was preferred before the NCLAT. By the judgment and order dated 25thNovember, 2021, the NCLAT dismissed the appeal.

The court held that once the Resolution Plan is approved by the NCLT, no belated claim can be included therein that was not made earlier. If such demands are taken into consideration, the appellants will not be in a position to recommence the business of the CD on a clean slate.

Case Details

Case Title: Vaibhav Goel & Anr. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.

Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 49 OF 2022

Date: 20/03/2025

Read More: Keraleeyam Ayurvedic Resort Primarily a Resort, Ayurvedic Treatment Incidental; Liable To Tax: Kerala High Court

Amit Sharma
Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like

Existence Of ‘International Transaction’ Must Be Established Before Transfer Pricing Benchmarking: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the existence of ‘international transaction’…

Finance Bill 2025: Government Amends Definition of ‘Capital Asset’

The Finance Bill 2025 has introduced a significant amendment to the definition…

Section 87A Rebate PIL Disposed Of By Bombay High Court: Issue Of Adjudication Of Eligibility Of Rebate Left To Dept.

The Bombay High Court has disposed of the Public Interest Litigation (PIL)…

Relief To Union Bank | Income Tax On Book Profits Not Applicable On ‘Corresponding New Bank’: ITAT

In a major relief to the Union Bank of India, the Mumbai…