Calcutta High Court
Income Tax vs Corporate Ispat Alloys Ltd on 14 November, 2022
OD-11
ITAT/119/2022
IA No.GA/1/2022,
GA/2/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax)
ORIGINAL SIDE
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATA
-Versus-
CORPORATE ISPAT ALLOYS LTD.
Appearance:
Ms. Smita Dsa De, Adv.
...for the appellant.
Mr. Iqbal Hussain Ansari,
...the Official Liquidator.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
-And-
The Hon'ble JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
Date : 14th November, 2022.
The Court: We have heard Ms. Smita Das De, learned
standing counsel for the appellant/revenue and Mr. Iqbal
Hussain Ansari, the Official Liquidator attached to this Court.
There is a delay of 926 days in filing the appeal.
On account of certain developments which have taken
place during the pendency of the appeal and the matter having
transferred to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), we
exercise discretion and condone the delay of 926 in filing the
appeal.
Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay
(IA No.GA/1/2022) stands allowed.
This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of
the Income Tax Act, is directed against the order dated 9th
August, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "B"
Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in IT(SS)A Nos.113 & 114/Kol/2017
for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12.
The revenue has raised the following substantial
questions of law for consideration:
(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case
and in law, the learned Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal erred in law by holding that deemed
dividend provisions under Section 2(22)(e) of the
Act would not apply in present case for the
Assessment Years ? 2010-11 and 2011-12 ?
(ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case
and in law, the provisions of Section 2(22)(e)
shall apply in this case, as the lending was made
to the beneficial owner through shareholding for
the Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-12 ?
(iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case
and in law, order of learned Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal for the Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-
12 is not maintainable as learned Tribunal has
erred in relying on judgments, none of which has
addressed the key issue regarding shareholders ?
(iv) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case
and in law, order of learned Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal for the Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-
12 is not maintainable as Learned Tribunal has
erred in relying on judgments in which set of facts
are completely different from present case ?
(v) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case
and in law, learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
has erred in deleting the addition made on account
of unaccounted sell in the Assessment Year 2011-12
?
(vi) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case
and in law, order of learned Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal is perverse, in view of facts that the
assessee has made unaccounted sell in the
Assessment Year 2011-12 ?
We have heard Ms. Smita Das De, learned standing
counsel for the appellant/revenue and the Official Liquidator
attached to this Court and perused the status report filed by
the learned Official Liquidator. It is submitted by the
learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the Official
Liquidator that CP No.896/2016 which was initially filed before
this Court has been transferred to the National Company Law
Tribunal (NCLT) and the connected applications have also been
transferred to the learned Tribunal. That apart, the claims
have also been lodged by the department before the learned
Official Liquidator. The copy of the order dated 7th November,
2022 passed in CP/896/2016 by the learned Single Bench shall be
kept on record.
In the light of the said development, we are not
required to decide the substantial question of law and while
leaving the substantial question of law open, we grant liberty
to the appellant/revenue to raise all pleas before the
NCLT/Official Liquidator.
Accordingly, this appeal (ITAT/11//2022) stands
disposed of.
Consequently, the connected application for stay (IA
No.GA/2/2022) also stands closed.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)
(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)
A/s./TR
