Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Patanjali Foods Limited vs The Assistant Commissioner St Fac on 5 December, 2023
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
MAIN CASE No:W.P.No.28529 OF 2023
PROCEEDING SHEET
SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE
NO. NOTE
RNT,J & AVRB,J
6. 05.12.2023
A preliminary objection has been raised by
the learned Government Pleader for Commercial
Tax that the order impugned dated 03.06.2023 is
appealable. The petition therefore may not be
entertained.
2. Sri Sujith Ghosh, learned counsel,
representing Sri S. Vivek Chandra Sekhar, learned
counsel for the petitioner, through Virtual Mode,
submits that the impugned order is without
jurisdiction, in view of the fact that the resolution
under the Insolvency and the Bankruptcy Code,
2016 was approved on 24.07.2019 which was later
amended on 04.09.2019 and the appeal filed there
against was dismissed on 09.12.2019. He further
submits that the impugned order is for the period
with effect from July 2017 upto March 2020.
3. Placing reliance on the judgments in the case
of Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private
Limited vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction
Company Limited and others1 as also in the
1
(2021) 9 SCC 657
2
SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE
NO. NOTE
case of Ruchi Soya Industries Limited and
others vs. Union of India and others2,
he submits that the claim in respect of any demand,
which was not lodged by the present respondent
after the public announcements were issued under
the said Act, all such claims stand frozen and no
claim, which is not a part of the resolution plan, will
survive. He submits that the said judgments would
apply in the cases of the demand of the GST as
well.
4. To the aforesaid submission, learned
Government Pleader submits, referring to
Regulation 6 (2) (b) of the Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution
Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016
(in short, Regulation 2016), that the public
announcement referred to in sub-regulation (1)
shall be published in one English and one regional
language newspaper with wide circulation at the
location of the registered office and principal office,
if any, of the corporate debtor and any other
location where in the opinion of the interim
resolution professional, the corporate debtor
conducts material business operations. His
submission is that with the above provisions, the
place of business also being at Kakinada in the
(2022) 6 SCC 343
SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE
NO. NOTE
State of Andhra Pradesh, the public notice should
have been issued there also, but as per the
document annexed, it was not made in the State of
Andhra Pradesh. Consequently, his further
submission is that Insolvency Resolution Plan would
not be binding on the present respondents, as there
was no opportunity to raise the claim. The
judgments, upon which reliance has been placed
are not attracted.
5. Learned Government Pleader, however,
submits that time may be granted to file the
counter affidavit and presently any process for
recovery under Section 78 has not been initiated.
6. Let the counter affidavit be filed within a
period of three (03) weeks, positively.
7. Since it has been submitted that as on today,
the process for recovery under Section 78 has yet
not been initiated, we are posting the matter for
26.12.2023, however, if in the meantime, any
process is initiated, liberty is granted to the
petitioner to file appropriate application.
________
RNT,J
________
AVRB,J
Scs
