TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the discharge of a reference by the BIFR on the sick industrial company's net worth becoming positive entitled the Department to withdraw concessions contained in a sanctioned scheme; (ii) Whether a sanctioned scheme under SICA continued to bind the Department even after discharge of the reference.
Issue (i): Whether the discharge of a reference by the BIFR on the sick industrial company's net worth becoming positive entitled the Department to withdraw concessions contained in a sanctioned scheme.
Analysis: The scheme under SICA is a statutory rehabilitation package framed after the company passes through the process under Sections 17 and 18. Once sanctioned, the scheme has the force of law and binds the company and all concerned entities covered by the Act. The mere fact that the company's net worth has turned positive does not automatically terminate the scheme or undo concessions already built into it. If the Department's view were accepted, the rehabilitation mechanism itself would be defeated and the remaining obligations and benefits under the sanctioned scheme would become ineffective.
Conclusion: No. The Department could not withdraw the concessions merely because the company's net worth had become positive and the reference had been discharged.
Issue (ii): Whether a sanctioned scheme under SICA continued to bind the Department even after discharge of the reference.
Analysis: Section 32 gives overriding effect to SICA and any scheme made under it over inconsistent provisions of other laws. A sanctioned scheme remains binding until it is fully worked out or lawfully modified, and the BIFR's discharge of reference on the ground of positive net worth does not by itself erase the statutory effect of the scheme. The proper course, if there is any grievance about non-implementation, is enforcement of the scheme in accordance with law, not unilateral resiling by the Department from the concessions already sanctioned.
Conclusion: Yes. The sanctioned scheme continued to bind the Department notwithstanding discharge of the reference.
Final Conclusion: The writ petitions failed because the Department had no right to ignore or withdraw from the sanctioned scheme merely due to improvement in the company's net worth, and the impugned orders were left undisturbed.
Ratio Decidendi: A sanctioned rehabilitation scheme under SICA, once validly sanctioned, has statutory force and remains binding on all covered parties until lawfully altered or fully implemented; discharge of the reference on the company becoming financially healthier does not by itself the parties from the scheme's concessions and obligations.
TaxTMI 
