TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
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
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 overrides the attachment and recovery measures taken by the GST authorities against the corporate debtor's assets during the corporate insolvency resolution process; (ii) Whether the GST authorities should release the attached assets to the interim resolution professional for completion of the insolvency resolution process.
Issue (i): Whether the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 overrides the attachment and recovery measures taken by the GST authorities against the corporate debtor's assets during the corporate insolvency resolution process.
Analysis: The Code was treated as a special and time-bound insolvency regime. Section 238 gives it overriding effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent contained in any other law. The moratorium under Section 14 prohibits proceedings against the corporate debtor and protects the insolvency estate from parallel recovery action. The reasoning was reinforced by the view that the Code is not a debt recovery mechanism and that attachments during CIRP frustrate preservation of assets and value maximisation.
Conclusion: The insolvency law prevails over the GST attachment and recovery proceedings, and the inconsistent action of the GST authorities cannot stand during CIRP.
Issue (ii): Whether the GST authorities should release the attached assets to the interim resolution professional for completion of the insolvency resolution process.
Analysis: Since the corporate debtor's assets are required to be taken into control for effective conduct of CIRP, continued attachment was found to obstruct management of the corporate debtor as a going concern and delay resolution. The Tribunal therefore directed release of the attached goods, raw materials and machinery so that the interim resolution professional could take possession, collate claims and proceed with the resolution process within the statutory timeline.
Conclusion: The attached assets were directed to be released to the interim resolution professional.
Final Conclusion: The application succeeded, and the GST attachment was held inapplicable against the corporate debtor's assets in view of the overriding insolvency regime.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an insolvency proceeding has commenced, the non-obstante clause in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code prevails over inconsistent recovery or attachment measures under other laws, and assets necessary for CIRP must be made available to the resolution professional.
TaxTMI 
