Patna High Court
Bhushan Power And Steel Limited vs The State Of Bihar on 17 February, 2025
Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4624 of 2022
======================================================
Bhushan Power and Steel Limiteed, a Company incorporated Under the
Companies Act, 1956, and validly Existing Company Under Companies Act
2013 With Bearing CIN U27100DL1999PLCI08350, PAN AAACB9760D,
BIhar GST NO. 10AAACB9760DlZ5 having its registered Office at 4th
Floor, A-2, NTH Complex, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, USO Road, Qutab
Institutional Area, New Delhi-110067, India and Major Steel Works at
Village-Thelkoloi, P.O.-Lapanga Tehsil Rengali, District-Sambalpur Odisha-
768212 and Local Office at Khata no. 413, Kishanganj Road, Damka Chowk,
Near Damka Chowk, Gulabbhag, Purnea, Bihar through its authorised
representative Mr. Gautam Kumar Sinha, aged about 51 Years (Constituted
Attorney), S/o Late (Dr.) H.K. Sinha, at Present resident of C-302, Bhushan
Power and Steel Ltd Township, Village-Thelkiloi, P.O.-Lapanga, Tehsil-
Rengali, District-Sambalpur, Odisha-768212.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary Cum Commissioner,
Commercial Taxes Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary Cum Commissioner, Commercial Taxes
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Joint Commissioner State Taxes, Commercial Taxes Department,
Government of Bihar, Purnea Circle, Purnea.
4. The Assistant Commissioner State Taxes, Commercial Taxes Department,
Government of Bihar, Purnea Circle, Purnea.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4637 of 2022
======================================================
Bhushan Power and Steel Limited, a company incorporated under the
Companies Act, 1956, and validly existing company under Companies Act
2013 with bearing CIN U27100DL1999PLC108350, PAN AAACB9760D,
Bihar GST No. 10AAACB9760D1Z5 having its registered office at 4th Floor,
A-2, NTH Complex, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, USO Road, Qutab
Institutional Area, New Delhi-110067, India and Major Steel works at
Village-Thelkoloi, P.O.-Lapanga Tehsil-Rengali, District-Sambalpur Odisha-
768212 and local office at Khata No. 413, Kishanganj Road, Damka Chowk,
Near Damka Chowk, Gulabbhag, Purnea, Bihar through its authorised
representative Mr. Gautam Kumar Sinha, aged about 51 years (Constituted
Attorney), S/o Late (Dr.) H.K. Sinha, at present resident of C-302, Bhushan
Power and Steel Ltd. Township, Village-Thelkoloi, P.O.-Lapanga, Tehsil-
Rengali, District-Sambalpur, Odisha-768212.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary cum Commissioner,
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
2/32
Commercial Taxes Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary cum Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Joint Commissioner State Taxes, Commercial Taxes Department,
Government of Bihar, Purnea Circle, Purnea.
4. The Assistant Commissioner State Taxes, Commercial Taxes Department,
Government of Bihar, Purnea Circle, Purnea.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4785 of 2022
======================================================
Bhushan Power and Steel Limited, a company incorporated under the
Companies Act, 1956, and validly existing company under Companies Act
2013 with bearing CIN U27100DL1999PLC108350, PAN AACB9760D,
Bihar GST No. 10AAACB9760D1Z5 having its registered office at 4th Floor,
A-2, NTH Complex, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, USO Road, Qutab
Institutional Area, New Delhi - 110067, India and Major Steel Works at
Village - Thelkoloi, P.O. - Lapanga Tehsil - Rengali, District - Sambalpur
Odisha - 768212 and local office at Khata No. 413, Kishanganj Road, Damka
Chowk, Near Damka Chowk, Gulabbhag, Purnea, Bihar through its
authorised representative Mr. Gautam Kumar Sinha, aged about 51 years
(Constituted Attorney), S/o Late (Dr.) H.K. Sinha, at present resident of C-
302, Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd. Township, Village - Thelkoloi, P.O. -
Lapanga, Tehsil - Rengali, District - Sambalpur, Odisha - 768212.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar, through Principal Secretary Cum Commissioner,
Commercial Taxes Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary Cum Commissioner, Commercial Taxes
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Joint Commissioner State Taxes, Commercial Taxes Department,
Government of Bihar, Purnea Circle, Purnea.
4. The Assistant Commissioner State Taxes, Commercial Taxes Department,
Government of Bihar, Purnea Circle, Purnea.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4624 of 2022)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunit Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vikash Kumar (SC11)
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4637 of 2022)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunit Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vikash Kumar (SC5)
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4785 of 2022)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Siddhartha Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vikash Kumar ( SC 11 )
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
3/32
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
CAV JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 17-02-2025
These three writ applications are raising common
questions for consideration, hence, on the request of the parties,
we have heard these writ applications together and the same are
being disposed of by this common judgment.
CWJC No.4624 of 2022
2. This writ application has been preferred for quashing
the assessment order dated 22.12.2021 passed by the Joint
Commissioner of State Taxes, Purnea Circle, Purnea under the
provisions of Bihar Entry Tax Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as
the 'Act of 1993') read with Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005
(hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 2005') whereby and
whereunder it has been held that the petitioner-company is liable
to pay Rs.21,12,013/- for the financial year 2016-17 towards
taxes/interest/fine/penalty. The petitioner has also prayed for
quashing of the demand notice dated 22.12.2021 issued under
Section 25 and 39 of the Act of 2005 by the Joint Commissioner
whereby and whereunder a demand of Rs. 21,12,013/- has been
raised against the petitioner-company for the financial year 2016-
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
4/32
17 on the basis of the impugned assessment order. The petitioner-
company has further prayed for quashing of the reminder notice
dated 01.02.2022.
CWJC No.4637 of 2022
3. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for
identical reliefs. The assessment order dated 20.12.2021 passed by
the Joint Commissioner of State Taxes, Purnea Circle, Purnea by
which the petitioner-company has been held liable to pay
Rs.5,78,195/- for the financial year 2016-17 towards
taxes/fine/penalty, the demand notice dated 20.12.2021 issued
under Section 25 and 39 of the Act of 2005 on the basis of the
impugned assessment order and reminder notice dated 01.02.2022
issued by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Purnea
Division, Purnea for the payment of said amount are impugned in
this writ application.
CWJC No.4785 of 2022
4. In this writ application the assessment order dated
28.12.2021
passed by the Joint Commissioner of State Taxes,
Purnea Circle, Purnea by which the petitioner-company has been
held liable to pay a fine of Rs.44500/- for the financial year 2016-
17, the demand notice dated 28.12.2021 issued by the Joint
Commissioner of State Taxes, Purnea Circle, Purnea and reminder
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
notice dated 01.02.2022 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of
State Tax, Purnea Division, Purnea are under challenge.
Brief Facts of the case
5. The petitioner-company is a Public Limited Company
incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956
having it's registered office in the Qutab Institutional Area, New
Delhi, India. It is said to be a leading manufacturer of flat and long
products and has state of the art plants at Chandigarh, Derabassi,
Kolkata, Orissa and other parts of India. Thus plants manufacture
value-added products covering the entire steel value chain right
from Coal Mining to manufacturing Pig Iron, DRI, Billets, HR
Coils, CR Coils, GP/GC Sheets, Precision Tubes, Black Pipe/GI
Pipe, Cable Tapes, Tor Steel, Carbon and Special Alloy Steel Wire
Rods and Rounds conforming to IS and international standards.
6. The respondents conducted a scrutiny of the returned
filed in ET-IV. It was found that the petitioner had shown a total
receipt of Rs.1901485927.00/- as the import value and payment
whereas in it's return filed under the Act of 2005 the Intra-State
sale and stock receipts have been shown at 1912717747.00/-.
Thus, in respect of entry tax it was found that the petitioner had
not correctly paid his entry tax. The petitioner was called upon to
show cause but no satisfactory explanation could be furnished to
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
the respondent authorities. In such circumstance, the assessment
order was passed and the petitioner-company has been held liable
to pay Rs.9,56,35,887/- on account of entry tax which is 5% of
Rs.1912757747/-. The petitioner has been further held liable to pay
a fine under Section 24(10) of the Act of 2005 read with Section 8
of the Act of 1993 which has been assessed at Rs.7,94,316/- and
after adjustment of the paid amount of Rs.383558/-, the balance
amount of Rs.4,10,758/- has been found payable. Similarly a sum
of Rs.44,500/- has been calculated as fine amount under Section
24(8) of the Act of 2005 read with Section 8 of the Act of 1993.
Ultimately under Rule 10 of the Act of 1993, it has been found that
the petitioner-company had not submitted form ET-X which is
violation of Rule 8 of the Act of 1993. For this a sum of Rs.1000/-
has been imposed as fine. In this manner, the petitioner has been
held liable to pay the following amounts:-
"dj dh jkf"k& # 9]56]35]887 = 00
C;kt u/s -20(10) -# 4]10]758 = 00
fine u/s -24(8) -# 44]500 = 00
"kfLr u/R-10 -# 1]000 = 00
dqy Hkqxrs; jkf"k & # 96092145 = 00
& Hkqxrku jkf"k & # 93980132 = 00
"ks'k Hkqxrku jkf"k & # 21]12]013 = 00
bl izdkj # 24]12]013 = 00 dk ek¡x i= fuxZr djsa rFkk iath esa
ntZ djsa A"
7. It appears from the averments made in the writ
application(s) that after the scrutiny the assessment order was passed,
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
the Joint Commissioner, State Taxes, Purnea Circle, Purnea issued
demand notice raising a demand of Rs.21,12,013/- (Rupees
Twenty One Lakh Twelve Thousand and Thirteen) and thereafter
initiated a recovery proceeding under the Act of 2005.
Submissions on behalf of the petitioner.
8. It is submitted that the demand raised by the
respondents under the indirect tax is no more payable by the
petitioner in view of approval of resolution plan under the
provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short
'IBC'). It is submitted that the against the petitioner-company, an
application under Section 7 of the IBC was filed by the Punjab
National Bank (CA 254 of 2019) before the National Company
Law Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter called
NCLT/Adjudicating Authority) for initiating Corporate Insolvency
Resolution Process (CIRP). The said application was admitted on
26.07.2017 and CIRP was initiated by appointing an Interim
Resolution Professional (IRP) by the NCLT in exercise of its
power under Section 16 of the IBC.
9. It is submitted that in terms of Section 17 of the IBC
read with Section 25 of the IBC the management of the affairs of
the petitioner-company was vested with the IRP as a going
concern. Thereafter a public announcement was made on
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
28.07.2017 under Regulation 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy
Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate
Persons) Regulations, 2016. An invitation was sent to all the
creditors of the Company to file pre-CIRP claims with proof, on or
before the last date mentioned in the Public Announcement.
10. The contention of the petitioner is that no claim
whatsoever was raised/filed by the respondents in respect of any of
its outstanding pre-CIRP dues as is being demanded now by
passing the impugned assessment order(s), demand notice(s) and
reminder notice(s). It is submitted that since the resolution plan
dated February 8, 2018 along with the addendum letter dated
October 10, 2018 submitted by JSW Steel Ltd. for the company
was approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) during the e-
voting held on 15-16 October, 2018 and thereafter the NCLT was
pleased to partially approve the resolution plan with certain
conditions, even as such conditions were set aside in appeal by the
NCLT vide order dated 17.02.2020 passed in Company Appeal
(AT) (Insolvency) No.957 of 2019 (JSW Steel Ltd. VS. Mahender
Kumar Khandelwal and others). The resolution plan has attained
finality on 17.02.2020.
11. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in
terms of the approved resolution plan all the claims and liabilities
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
of the petitioner-company for the period prior to effective
date/approval of resolution plan has been extinguished, save and
except as provided under the approved resolution plan. With
respect to outstanding government dues, taxes, etc. it has been
further clarified that in clause 1.6 (vii) of the proposal it is
provided that all dues under the provisions of any indirect tax laws
in relation to any period prior to the effective date or arising on
account of the acquisition of control by resolution applicant over
the company pursuant to the resolution plan shall, in accordance
with Regulation 37 of the CIRP Regulations, stand extinguished
by virtue of the order of the NCLT approving the resolution plan
and the company shall not be liable to pay any such claim other
than as specifically provided in the resolution plan. The effective
date is 05.09.2019. It is submitted that according to clause 1.6 of
the resolution plan, all the notices, assessments, appellate or other
proceedings pending or threatened in relation to the company, in
relation to any period prior to the effective date shall stand
terminated and withdrawn and all the consequential liabilities if
any shall, in accordance with Regulation 37 of the CIRP
Regulations, stand extinguished.
12. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
approved resolution plan is binding on all stakeholders of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
company in terms of Section 31 of IBC. It is further submitted that
the impugned assessment order dated 22.12.2021 is illegal and
without jurisdiction since it has been passed by the Joint
Commissioner of State Taxes, Purnea Circle, Purnea much
belatedly after successful resolution by IRP and much after the
new Board of Directors along with the management team have
taken over the operations of petitioner-company with effect from
26.03.2021.
13. It is submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited
Vs. Satish Kumar Gupta and Others reported in (2020) 8 SCC
531 has held that "A successful resolution applicant cannot
suddenly be faced with "undecided" claims after the resolution
plan has been accepted as this would amount to a hydra head
popping up which would throw into uncertainty amounts payable
by a prospective resolution applicant who successfully take over
the business of the corporate debtor. All claims must be submitted
to and decided by the resolution professional so that a prospective
resolution applicant knows exactly what has to be paid in order
that it may then take over and run the business of the corporate
debtor."
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
14. Learned counsel has relied upon the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ghanashyam Mishra and
sons Pvt. Ltd. vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company
Ltd. (C.A. No.8129 of 2019) reported in (2021) 9 SCC 657 in
which it has been held that the successful resolution applicant
cannot be flung with surprise claims which are not part of the
resolution plan. It has been opined by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
that in the resolution plan as approved by NCLT, the claims, which
are not part of the resolution plan, shall stand extinguished and the
proceedings related thereto shall stand terminated. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court found that the subject matter of the petition are the
proceedings, which relate to the claims of the respondents prior to
the approval of the plan, the same cannot be continued, equally the
claims, which are not part of the resolution plan, shall stand
extinguished.
15. In the aforementioned background, it is contended
that not a single penny whatsoever in form of
taxes/interest/fine/penalty under the provisions of the Act of 1993
read with the Act of 2005 for the assessment year 2016-17 is
payable by the petitioner-company. It is contended that in fact
from the extract of Auditor's report it may be found that the
petitioner-company is eligible for some refund amount. Reliance
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
has also been placed upon the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High
Court in the case of Uttam Value Steels Limited and Another
versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Others
(Writ Petition (L) No. 940 of 2022) and the judgment dated
08.12.2021 passed by the Hon'ble Orissa High Court in W.P.(C)
No.459 of 2015. It is contended that in exactly similar manner the
Commercial Taxes Department of Orissa had issued demand
notice for payment of entry tax and the petitioner-company
challenged the same in the Orissa High Court. The plea of the
petitioner-company has been allowed and the demand letter has
been quashed by the Hon'ble High Court.
Submission on behalf of Respondents
16. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the
respondents. It is stated therein that the petitioner-company was
selected for VAT audit by the Commercial Tax Commissioner,
Bihar Patna for the financial year 2016-17 under Section 26 of the
Act of 2005. A notice for audit of books of accounts was issued to
the petitioner-company by the office of the Additional
Commissioner of State Tax (Audit), Purnea Division, Purnea. The
petitioner failed to produce the books of accounts and relevant
documents for VAT Audit, thereafter the Additional Commissioner,
State Tax (Audit), Purnea Division had prepared and forwarded the
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
final audit report under Section 22 of the Act of 2005 to the Joint
Commissioner, State Tax Circle Incharge, Purnea Circle, Purnea
for further necessary action.
17. It is stated that the Joint Commissioner of State Tax
(respondent no.3) issued notice to the petitioner for producing the
books of accounts and relevant documents for examination under
Section 8 of the Act of 1993 read with Section 31, 24(8) of the Act
of 2005 and Rule 65 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Rule, 2005 and
Rule 10 of the Bihar Entry Tax Rule, 1993. Copy of the notice has
been brought on record as Annexure-C, D and E of the counter
affidavit. Perusal of the same would show that these notices were
issued to the petitioner-company on 21.09.2020.
18. It is further submitted that Sri Abhishek Kumar
Tiwary presented the books and account, statutory forms and other
relevant documents for examination of the facts in the compliance
of served notices. After proper examination of the books and
account, the petitioner was served with a demand notice of
Rs.2112013.00 under Section 31, 24(8) of the Act of 2005 read
with Rule 65 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Rule, 2005 and under
Rule 10 of the Bihar Entry Tax Rule, 1993. The Respondent no.3
found from the books of accounts produced by the petitioner that
Interstate Purchase/Receipt declared in Annual Return filed under
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
the Act of 2005 was less than the declared Interstate
Purchase/Receipt in his books of account. It was found that the
sales or purchases of goods liable to tax under the Act of 1993 has
been under-assessed by the petitioner-company. The petitioner-
company had not paid the admitted entry tax payable by him and
not filed annual return so fine and interest has been imposed upon
the petitioner-company. The petitioner has not filed his entry tax
reconciliation statement in form ET-X so excess tax paid in the
month of March, 2016 not computed in the assessment order
passed by respondent no.3.
19. It is submitted that the petitioner had got itself
registered under Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (BGST)
upon migration from the Act of 2005. The principal place of
business and trade name bears the same as it is registered in the
Act of 2005 and the petitioner is still doing business in the Trade
Name of M/s Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd. The irony is that the
petitioner is still using the "Goodwill" of same trade name even
today. Referring to Section 63 of the Act of 2005, it is submitted
that it provides liability to pay tax in case of transfer of business. It
is submitted that when the ownership of the business of a dealer
liable to pay tax under this Act is entirely transferred, the
transferor and the transferee shall jointly and severally be liable to
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
pay any tax, interest and penalty if any payable in respect of such
business and remaining unpaid at the time of transfer.
20. As regards the applicability of IBC, it is submitted
that there is no liability of payment of taxes, interest, fine and
penalty on the part of the petitioner-company as it is pre corporate
insolvency resolution process. The first notice has been served
upon the petitioner by the office of Additional Commissioner of
State Tax (Audit), Purnea Division on 18.09.2018 to produce
books of accounts for VAT audit. The petitioner-company
submitted resolution plan on 10.10.2018 and NCLT approved the
resolution plan submitted by JSW Steel Ltd. on 05.09.2019. On
17.02.2020, the NCLAT passed the order.
21. There is no rejoinder on behalf of the petitioner to
the counter affidavit of the respondents.
22. Since, the other two writ applications contained
identical kind of pleadings on behalf of the parties, we are not
reiterating the same.
Consideration
23. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel for the State-respondents. It is a matter of record that
the petitioner company was facing proceeding before the NCLT at the
instance of Punjab National Bank, a financial creditor of the petitioner
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
company. The IBC has come into existence vide Act No. 31 of 2016
dated 28.05.2016. The preamble of the IBC reads as under:-
"An Act to consolidate and amend the laws relating to
reorganisation and insolvency resolution of corporate
persons, partnership firms and individuals in a time bound
manner for maximisation of value of assets of such
persons, to promote entrepreneurship, availability of credit
and balance the interests of all the stakeholders including
alteration in the order of priority of payment of
Government dues and to establish an Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Board of India, and for matters connected
therewith or incidental thereto."
24. Section 3 of the IBC is the definitions Section which
defines "debt". Under clause (11) of Section 3. "Debt" means a
liability or obligation in respect of a claim which is due from any
person and includes a financial debt and operational debt. Section 7
lays down the procedure for initiation of corporate insolvency
resolution process against by a financial creditor either by itself or
jointly. Section 10 talks of initiation of corporate insolvency
resolution process by a a corporate applicant.
25. Section 13 provides for Declaration of moratorium and
public announcement. Section Section 13 and 14 of IBC are being
reproduced hereinbelow for a ready reference:-
"13. Declaration of moratorium and public announcement
(1) The Adjudicating Authority, after admission of the
application under section 7 or section 9 or section 10, shall, by
an order--
(a) declare a moratorium for the purposes referred to in
section 14;
(b) cause a public announcement of the initiation of corporate
insolvency resolution process and call for the submission of
claims under section 15; and
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
(c) appoint an interim resolution professional in the manner as
laid down in section 16.
(2) The public announcement referred to in clause (b) of sub-
section (1) shall be made immediately after the appointment
of the interim resolution professional.
14. Moratorium
(1) Subject to provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3), on the
insolvency commencement date, the Adjudicating Authority
shall by order declare moratorium for prohibiting all of the
following, namely:--
(a) the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or
proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution
of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal,
arbitration panel or other authority;
(b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of by
the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal right or
beneficial interest therein;
(c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security
interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its
property including any action under the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002);
(d) the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where
such property is occupied by or in the possession of the
corporate debtor.
(2) The supply of essential goods or services to the corporate
debtor as may be specified shall not be terminated or suspended or
interrupted during moratorium period.
[(2-A) Where the interim resolution professional or resolution
professional, as the case may be, considers the supply of goods or
services critical to protect and preserve the value of the corporate
debtor and manage the operations of such corporate debtor as a
going concern, then the supply of such goods or services shall not
be terminated, suspended or interrupted during the period of
moratorium, except where such corporate debtor has not paid dues
arising from such supply during the moratorium period or in such
circumstances as may be specified.]
[(3) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to -
[(a) such transactions, agreement or other arrangements as may be
notified by the Central Government in consultation with any
financial sector regulator or any other authority;]
1. Inserted by Act 1 of 2020, S. 5 (w.r.e.f. 28-12-2019).
2. Substituted by Act 26 of 2018, S. 10, for sub-S. (3) (w.r.e.f. 6-6-2018).
3. Substituted by Act 1 of 2020, S. 5, for Cl. (a) (w.r.e.f. 28-12-2019).
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
(4) The order of moratorium shall have effect from the date of
such order till the completion of the corporate insolvency
resolution process:
Provided that where at any time during the corporate
insolvency resolution process period, if the Adjudicating
Authority approves the resolution plan under sub-section (1)
of section 31 or passes an order for liquidation of corporate
debtor under section 33, the moratorium shall cease to have
effect from the date of such approval or liquidation order, as
the case may be."
26. Section 15 provides that there shall be public
announcement of the corporate insolvency resolution process under the
order referred to in Section 13 contain the following information,
namely, -
a) name and address of the corporate debtor under the corporate
insolvency resolution process;
(b) name of the authority with which the corporate debtor is
incorporated or registered;
(c) the last date for submission of 4[claims, as may be specified];
(d) details of the interim resolution professional who shall be
vested with the management of the corporate debtor and be
responsible for receiving claims;
(e) penalties for false or misleading claims; and
(f) the date on which the corporate insolvency resolution process
shall close, which shall be the one hundred and eightieth day
from the date of the admission of the application under sections
7, 9 or section 10, as the case may be.
(2) The public announcement under this section shall be made in
such manner as may be specified.
27. Under the scheme of the IBC, the Adjudicating Authority
has power under Section 16 to appoint any interim resolution
professional within fourteen days. Under Section 17 the management of
affairs of corporate debtor by interim resolution professional from the
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
date of appointment of the interim resolution professional and the
powers of the board of directors or the partners of the corporate debtor,
as the case may be, shall stand suspended and be exercised by the
interim resolution professional. The management of affairs of corporate
debtor shall vest with the interim resolution professional and he shall
exercise the following powers -
a) the management of the affairs of the corporate debtor shall
vest in the interim resolution professional;
(b) the powers of the board of directors or the partners of the
corporate debtor, as the case may be, shall stand suspended
and be exercised by the interim resolution professional;
(c) the officers and managers of the corporate debtor shall
report to the interim resolution professional and provide
access to such documents and records of the corporate debtor
as may be required by the interim resolution professional;
(d) the financial institutions maintaining accounts of the
corporate debtor shall act on the instructions of the interim
resolution professional in relation to such accounts and
furnish all information relating to the corporate debtor
available with them to the interim resolution professional.
28. For this purpose, certain powers have been vested
with the interim resolution professional under Sub-Section (2) of
Section 20.
29. Section 21 talks of Committee of creditors.
According to Sub-Section (1), the interim resolution professional
shall after collation of all claims received against the corporate
debtor and determination of financial position of the corporate
debtor, constitute a committee of creditors. Sub-Section (2)
provides that the committee of creditors shall comprise all
financial creditors of the corporate debtor.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
30. Then comes Section 22 which provides
appointment of resolution professional. Under Section 23
resolution professional to conduct corporate insolvency
resolution process and Section 24 provides for meeting of
committee of creditors. Section 25 of the IBC provides duties of
resolution professional. The resolution professional has to
undertake the actions such as provided under Sub-Section (2) of
Section 25.
31. Section 28(1) states that notwithstanding anything
contained in any other law for the time being in force, the
resolution professional, during the corporate insolvency
resolution process, shall not take any of the following actions
without the prior approval of the committee of creditors namely:
(a) raise any interim finance in excess of the amount as may be
decided by the committee of creditors in their meeting;
(b) create any security interest over the assets of the corporate
debtor;
(c) change the capital structure of the corporate debtor,
including by way of issuance of additional securities, creating a
new class of securities or buying back or redemption of issued
securities in case the corporate debtor is a company;
(d) record any change in the ownership interest of the corporate
debtor;
(e) give instructions to financial institutions maintaining
accounts of the corporate debtor for a debit transaction from
any such accounts in excess of the amount as may be decided
by the committee of creditors in their meeting;
(f) undertake any related party transaction;
(g) amend any constitutional documents of the corporate
debtor;
(h) delegate its authority to any other person;
(i) dispose of or permit the disposal of shares of any shareholder of
the corporate debtor or their nominees to third parties;
(j) make any change in the management of the corporate debtor or
its subsidiary;
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
(k) transfer rights or financial debts or operational debts under
material contracts otherwise than in the ordinary course of business;
(l) make changes in the appointment or terms of contract of such
personnel as specified by the committee of creditors; or
(m) make changes in the appointment or terms of contract of
statutory auditors or internal auditors of the corporate debtor.
(2) The resolution professional shall convene a meeting of the
committee of creditors and seek the vote of the creditors prior to
taking any of the actions under sub-section (1).
(3) No action under sub-section (1) shall be approved by the
committee of creditors unless approved by a vote of 1[sixty-six]
percent of the voting shares.
(4) Where any action under sub-section (1) is taken by the
resolution professional without seeking the approval of the
committee of creditors in the manner as required in this section,
such action shall be void.
(5) The committee of creditors may report the actions of the
resolution professional under sub-section (4) to the Board for taking
necessary actions against him under this Code.
32. Sections 30 and 31 provides for submission and
approval of resolution plan. Both Sections are being quoted
hereunder:-
"30. Submission of Resolution Plan. - (1) A resolution
applicant may submit a resolution plan 1[along with an affidavit
stating that he is eligible under section 29-A] to the resolution
professional prepared on the basis of the information
memorandum.
(2) The resolution professional shall examine each resolution
plan received by him to confirm that each resolution plan -
(a) provides for the payment of insolvency resolution process
costs in a manner specified by the Board in priority to the
[payment] of other debts of the corporate debtor;
[(b) provides for the payment of the debts of operational
creditors in such manner as may be specified by the Board
which shall not be less than -
(i) the amount to be paid to such creditors in the event of a
liquidation of the corporate debtor under section 53; or
(ii) the amount that would have been paid to such creditors, if
the amount to be distributed under the resolution plan had been
distributed in accordance with the order of priority in sub-
section (1) of section 53,
1. Substituted by Act 26 of 2018, S. 21, for "seventy-five" (w.r.e.f. 6-6-2018).
1. Inserted by Act 26 of 2018, S. 23 (w.r.e.f. 6-6-2018).
2. Substituted by Act 26 of 2018, S. 23, for "repayment" (w.r.e.f. 6-6-2018).
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
whichever is higher, and provides for the payment of debts of
financial creditors, who do not vote in favour of the resolution
plan, in such manner as may be specified by the Board, which
shall not be less than the amount to be paid to such creditors in
accordance with sub-section (1) of section 53 in the event of a
liquidation of the corporate debtor.
(c) provides for the management of the affairs of the Corporate
debtor after approval of the resolution plan;
(d) the implementation and supervision of the resolution plan;
(e) does not contravene any of the provisions of the law for the
time being in force;
(f) conforms to such other requirements as may be specified by the
Board.
(3) The resolution professional shall present to the committee of
creditors for its approval such resolution plans which confirm the
conditions referred to in sub-section (2).
[(4) The committee of creditors may approve a resolution plan by
a vote of not less than 3[sixty-six] per cent. of voting share of the
financial creditors, after considering its feasibility and viability,
[the manner of distribution proposed, which may take into
account the order of priority amongst creditors as laid down in
sub-section (1) of section 53, including the priority and value of
the security interest of a secured creditor] and such other
requirements as may be specified by the Board:
Provided that the committee of creditors shall not approve a
resolution plan, submitted before the commencement of the
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance, 2017
(Ord. 7 of 2017), where the resolution applicant is ineligible
under section 29-A and may require the resolution professional to
invite a fresh resolution plan where no other resolution plan is
available with it:
Provided further that where the resolution applicant referred to in
the first proviso is ineligible under clause (c) of section 29-A, the
resolution applicant shall be allowed by the committee of
creditors such period, not exceeding thirty days, to make payment
of overdue amounts in accordance with the proviso to clause (c)
of section 29-A:
Provided also that nothing in the second proviso shall be construed as
extension of period for the purposes of the proviso to sub-section (3)
of section 12, and the corporate insolvency resolution process shall
be completed within the period specified in that sub-section:]
[Provided also that the eligibility criteria in section 29-A as amended
by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance,
2018 (Ord. 6 of 2018) shall apply to the resolution application who
has not submitted resolution plan as on the date of commencement of
the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018
(Ord. 6 of 2018).]
2. Substituted by Act 8 of 2018, S. 6, for sub-S. (4) (w.r.e.f. 23-11-2017).
3. Substituted by Act 26 of 2018, S. 23, for "seventy-five" (w.r.e.f. 6-6-2018).
4. Inserted by Act 26 of 2019, S. 6(b) (w.e.f. 16-8-2019).
1. Inserted by Act 26 of 2018, S. 23 (w.r.e.f. 6-6-2018).
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
(5) The resolution applicant may attend the meeting of the
committee of creditors in which the resolution plan of the
applicant is considered:
Provided that the resolution applicant shall not have a right to
vote at the meeting of the committee of creditors unless such
resolution applicant is also a financial creditor.
(6) The resolution professional shall submit the resolution plan
as approved by the committee of creditors to the Adjudicating
Authority.
31. Approval of Resolution Plan. - (1) If the Adjudicating
Authority is satisfied that the resolution plan as approved by
the committee of creditors under sub-section (4) of section 30
meets the requirements as referred to in sub-section (2) of
section 30, it shall by order approve the resolution plan which
shall be binding on the corporate debtor and its employees,
members, creditors, 2[including the Central Government, any
State Government or any local authority to whom a debt in
respect of the payment of dues arising under any law for the
time being in force, such as authorities to whom statutory dues
are owed,] guarantors and other stakeholders involved in the
resolution plan:
[Provided that the Adjudicating Authority shall, before passing
an order for approval of resolution plan under this sub-section,
satisfy that the resolution plan has provisions for its effective
implementation.]
(2) Where the Adjudicating Authority is satisfied that the
resolution plan does not confirm to the requirements referred
to in sub-section (1), it may, by an order, reject the resolution
plan.
(3) After the order of approval under sub-section (1),--
(a) the moratorium order passed by the Adjudicating Authority
under section 14 shall cease to have effect; and
(b) the resolution professional shall forward all records relating to the
conduct of the corporate insolvency resolution process and the
resolution plan to the Board to be recorded on its database.
[(4) The resolution applicant shall, pursuant to the resolution plan
approved under sub-section (1), obtain the necessary approval
required under any law for the time being in force within a period of
one year from the date of approval of the resolution plan by the
Adjudicating Authority under sub-section (1) or within such period
as provided for in such law, whichever is later:
Provided that where the resolution plan contains a provision for
combination, as referred to in section 5 of the Competition Act, 2002
(12 of 2003), the resolution applicant shall obtain the approval of the
Competition Commission of India under that Act prior to the
approval of such resolution plan by the committee of creditors.]"
2. Inserted by Act 26 of 2019, S. 7 (w.e.f. 16-8-2019)
3. Inserted by Act 26 of 2018, S. 24 (w.r.e.f. 6-6-2018).
1. Inserted by Act 26 of 2018, S. 24 (w.r.e.f. 6-6-2018)
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
33. It is evident from Section 31 of the IBC that a
resolution plan submitted under Section 30 has to be approved by
the Adjudicating Authority and then the same shall be binding on
the corporate debtor and its employees, members, creditors,
guarantors and other stakeholders involved in the resolution plan.
34. In the present case, the resolution plan has been
approved by the Adjudicating Authority on 05.09.2019. In
paragraph '16' of the writ application, the petitioner has quoted
clause 1.6 (vii) of the Resolution Plan (Part B) which is with
respect to the outstanding Government dues, tax etc. The same is
being reproduced hereunder:-
"1.6 Outstanding Govt. Dues, taxes, etc..
...........................
...........................
vii. Further, specifically, all dues under the provisions of
any indirect tax laws, including but not limited to, the
Central Excise Act, 1944, the Finance Act, 1994
(Service Tax), the Customs Act, 1962, Value Added Tax
Act, 2005, the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the
Electricity Act, 2003, the Goods and Services Tax Act,
2017 (each as amended from time to time and including
the rules made thereunder) including entry taxes,
electricity duty, cross subsidy on electricity duty, sales
tax deferral liabilities, duties, penalties, interest, fines,
cesses, charges, unpaid tax deducted at source or tax
collected at source. Octroi tax, stamp duty, local body
tax, municipal taxes, or other fiscal incentives
(including without limitation, the tax dues in relation to
the cases set out in Annexure 4 (Details of Company
Litigation)) whether admitted or not. due or contingent,
whether or not set out in the Provisional Balance Sheet,
the balance sheets of the Company or the profit and loss
account statements of the Company or the List of
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
Creditors, asserted or unasserted, crystallised or
uncrystallised, known or unknown, secured or
unsecured, disputed or undisputed, present or future, in
relation to any period prior to the Effective Date, or
arising on account of the acquisition of control by
Resolution Applicant over the Company pursuant to this
Resolution Plan, shall, in accordance with Regulation
37 of the CIRP Regulations, stand extinguished by
virtue of the order of the NCLT approving this
Resolution Plan and the Company shall not be liable to
pay any such claim other than as specifically provided
in this Resolution Plan. All notices, assessments,
appellate or other proceedings pending or threatened in
relation to the Company, in relation to any period prior
to the Effective Date or arising on account of the
acquisition of control by Resolution Applicant over the
Company pursuant to this Resolution Plan, or on
account of the measures contemplated under this
Resolution Plan shall stand terminated and withdrawn
and all consequential liabilities, if any, shall, in
accordance with Regulation 37 of the CIRP Regulations,
stand extinguished and be considered as not payable by
the Company by virtue of the order of the NCLT
approving this Resolution Plan and any re-assessment,
revision or other proceedings under the provisions of an
indirect tax law would be deemed to be barred in
relation to any period prior to the Effective Date, by
virtue of the order of the NCLT approving this
Resolution Plan and the Company, the Resolution
Applicant. HoldCo and the SPV shall at no point of time
be, directly or indirectly, held responsible or liable in
relation thereto." (Emphasis added by the deponent)"
35. On reading of clause 1.6 (vii) of the Resolution Plan, it is
evident that it takes within its fold the 'dues' under the provisions of any
indirect tax laws in relation to any part prior to the effective date. A
question would, thus, arise in the present case as to whether in the
present case it may be said that the demand in question are the dues in
relation to any part prior to the effective date. The effective date as
submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner would be 05.09.2019 i.e.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
the date the Adjudicating Authority was pleased to approve the
Resolution Plan with certain conditions.
36. In the case of Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private
Limited (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered the effect
of approval of resolution plan under Section 31 of the IBC. Paragraphs
'64', '65', '68', '84', '95', '96', '97', '98' and '102' of the said
judgment are being extracted hereunder for a ready reference:-
"64. It could thus be seen, that the legislature has
given paramount importance to the commercial
wisdom of CoC and the scope of judicial review
by adjudicating authority is limited to the extent
provided under Section 31 of the I&B Code and
of the appellate authority is limited to the extent
provided under sub-section (3) of Section 61 of
the I&B Code, is no more res integra.
65. Bare reading of Section 31 of the I&B Code
would also make it abundantly clear that once the
resolution plan is approved by the adjudicating
authority, after it is satisfied, that the resolution
plan as approved by CoC meets the requirements
as referred to in sub-section (2) of Section 30, it
shall be binding on the corporate debtor and its
employees, members, creditors, guarantors and
other stakeholders. Such a provision is
necessitated since one of the dominant purposes
of the I&B Code is revival of the corporate debtor
and to make it a running concern.
68. All these details are required to be contained
in the information memorandum so that the
resolution applicant is aware as to what are the
liabilities that he may have to face and provide for
a plan, which apart from satisfying a part of such
liabilities would also ensure, that the corporate
debtor is revived and made a running
establishment. The legislative intent of making
the resolution plan binding on all the stakeholders
after it gets the seal of approval from the
adjudicating authority upon its satisfaction, that
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
the resolution plan approved by CoC meets the
requirement as referred to in sub-section (2) of
Section 30 is that after the approval of the
resolution plan, no surprise claims should be
flung on the successful resolution applicant. The
dominant purpose is that he should start with
fresh slate on the basis of the resolution plan
approved.
84. It is clear that the mischief which was noticed
prior to amendment of Section 31 of the I&B
Code was that though the legislative intent was to
extinguish all such debts owed to the Central
Government, any State Government or any local
authority, including the tax authorities once an
approval was granted to the resolution plan by
NCLT; on account of there being some ambiguity,
the State/Central Government authorities
continued with the proceedings in respect of the
debts owed to them. In order to remedy the said
mischief, the legislature thought it appropriate to
clarify the position that once such a resolution
plan was approved by the adjudicating authority,
all such claims/dues owed to the State/Central
Government or any local authority including tax
authorities, which were not part of the resolution
plan shall stand extinguished.
95. There is another reason which persuades us to
take the said view. Clause (10) of Section 3 of the
I&B Code defines "creditor" thus:
"3. (10) "creditor" means any person to whom a
debt is owed and includes a financial creditor, an
operational creditor, a secured creditor, an
unsecured creditor and a decree-holder;"
96. Clauses (20) and (21) of Section 5 of the I&B
Code define "operational creditor" and
"operational debt" respectively as such:
"5. (20) "operational creditor" means a person
to whom an operational debt is owed and includes
any person to whom such debt has been legally
assigned or transferred;
(21) "operational debt" means a claim in respect
of the provision of goods or services including
employment or a debt in respect of the payment
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
of dues arising under any law for the time being
in force and payable to the Central Government,
any State Government or any local authority;"
97. "Creditor" therefore has been defined to mean
"any person to whom a debt is owed and includes
a financial creditor, an operational creditor, a
secured creditor, an unsecured creditor and a
decree-holder". "Operational creditor" has been
defined to mean a person to whom an operational
debt is owed and includes any person to whom
such debt has been legally assigned or transferred.
"Operational debt" has been defined to mean a
claim in respect of the provision of goods or
services including employment or a debt in
respect of the payment of dues arising under any
law for the time being in force and payable to the
Central Government, any State Government or
any local authority.
98. It is a cardinal principle of law that a statute
has to be read as a whole. Harmonious
construction of clause (10) of Section 3 of the
I&B Code read with clauses (20) and (21) of
Section 5 thereof would reveal that even a claim
in respect of dues arising under any law for the
time being in force and payable to the Central
Government, any State Government or any local
authority would come within the ambit of
"operational debt". The Central Government, any
State Government or any local authority to whom
an operational debt is owed would come within
the ambit of "operational creditor" as defined
under clause (20) of Section 5 of the I&B Code.
Consequently, a person to whom a debt is owed
would be covered by the definition of "creditor"
as defined under clause (10) of Section 3 of the
I&B Code. As such, even without the 2019
Amendment, the Central Government, any State
Government or any local authority to whom a
debt is owed, including the statutory dues, would
be covered by the term "creditor" and in any case,
by the term "other stakeholders" as provided in
sub-section (1) of Section 31 of the I&B Code.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
102. In the result, we answer the questions framed
by us as under:
102.1. That once a resolution plan is duly
approved by the adjudicating authority under sub-
section (1) of Section 31, the claims as provided
in the resolution plan shall stand frozen and will
be binding on the corporate debtor and its
employees, members, creditors, including the
Central Government, any State Government or
any local authority, guarantors and other
stakeholders. On the date of approval of
resolution plan by the adjudicating authority, all
such claims, which are not a part of resolution
plan, shall stand extinguished and no person will
be entitled to initiate or continue any proceedings
in respect to a claim, which is not part of the
resolution plan.
102.2. The 2019 Amendment to Section 31 of the
I&B Code is clarificatory and declaratory in
nature and therefore will be effective from the
date on which the I&B Code has come into effect.
102.3. Consequently all the dues including the
statutory dues owed to the Central Government,
any State Government or any local authority, if
not part of the resolution plan, shall stand
extinguished and no proceedings in respect of
such dues for the period prior to the date on which
the adjudicating authority grants its approval
under Section 31 could be continued."
37. The Hon'ble Division Bench of the Bombay High
Court has in its judgment dated August 28, 2024 in Writ Petition
(L) No. 940 of 2022 (Uttam Value Steels Limited and Another
versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Others)
taken a view that once a resolution plan is duly approved under
Section 31(1) of the IBC with debts as provided for in the
resolution plan alone shall remain payable and such position
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
shall be binding on among others, the Central Government and
various authorities including Tax Authorities. It has been
observed that "all dues which are not part of the resolution plan
would stand extinguished and no person would be entitled to
initiate or continue any proceeding in respect of any claim for
any such dues. No proceeding in respect of any dues relating to
the period prior to the approval of the resolution plan can be
continued or initiated.
38. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court referred its own
judgment in case of Alok Industries Limited versus Assistant
Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 2024 SCC Online
Bom 3481 and AMNS Khopoli Limited versus Assistant
Commissioner of Income Tax (supra) to take a view that since
the resolution plan expressly provides that no person shall be
entitled to initiate any proceeding or inquiry, assessment enforce
any claim or continue any proceeding in relation to claim so
long such resolution to a period prior to the effective date of the
resolution plan i.e. 10th November, 2022 impugned notices are
bad in law.
39. In the case of Adhunik Metaliks Limited Vs. State
of Orissa and Ors. decided on 08.12.2022 in WP (C) No. 1553 of
2022, the Hon'ble Orissa High Court examined the validity of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
demands raised against the petitioner for the periods prior to the
period during which the proceedings were pending vis-a-vis the
petitioner before the NCLT under the IBC. The Hon'ble Division
Bench relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited (supra), quoted
paragraphs '93' to '98' of the said judgment and held that the
resolution plan was made effective on 03 rd March, 2020 with the
orders of the NCLAT by which resolution plan was made effective.
In such circumstance, the demands raised against the petitioner for
the periods prior to the period during which the proceedings were
pending would be liable to be quashed.
40. In the present case, we find that NCLT approved the
resolution plan on 05.09.2019 and the NCLAT affirmed the order of
NCLT on 17.02.2020. The audit by Commercial Tax Department,
Government of Bihar under the Assessment Year 2016-17 was taken up
on 12.02.2020 and pursuant to the audit notice, notices were issued to
the petitioner on 25.08.2020 and the assessment order impugned in the
writ application had been passed on 22.12.2021.
41. Having gone through the judgments of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court and that of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and
Hon'ble Orissa High Court and taking into consideration the facts
the present case wherein it is apparent that the order of assessment
and demand arising out of the same pertains to a period prior to the
Patna High Court CWJC No.4624 of 2022 dt.17-02-2025
effective date, we are of the considered opinion that the present
case would be covered by the ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Ghanashyam Mishra (supra). We
find ourselves in agreement with the judgment of the Hon'ble
Bombay High Court and the Hon'ble Orissa High Court.
Accordingly, the impugned order of assessment dated 22.12.2021
and demand notice dated 22.12.2021 as contained in Annexure-1
and 2 respectively in CWJC No.4624 of 2022, the impugned order
of assessment dated 20.12.2021 and demand notice dated
20.12.2021 as contained in Annexure-1 and 2 in CWJC No.4637 of
2022 and impugned order of assessment dated 28.12.2021 and
demand notice dated 28.12.2021 as contained in Annexure-1 and 2
respectively in CWJC No.4785 of 2022 are hereby quashed.
42. In result, these writ applications stand allowed to the
extent indicated hereinabove.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
( Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)
arvind/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE 04.02.2025
Uploading Date 27.02.2025
Transmission Date
