TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal rules against violation of moratorium order, directs return of seized documents, and imposes compensatory cost.</h1> <h3>K. Easwara Pillai – Resolution Professional Mangomeadows Agricultural Pleasure Land Private Limited Versus Goods and Services Tax Department and Kosamattam Finance Limited Versus Mangomeadows Agricultural Pleasure Land Private Limited</h3> K. Easwara Pillai – Resolution Professional Mangomeadows Agricultural Pleasure Land Private Limited Versus Goods and Services Tax Department and ... Issues involved:The issues involved in this judgment are the violation of the moratorium order passed under section 14 of IBC, 2016 through the search and seizure of records of the corporate debtor and the issuance of summons to the applicant/resolution professional.Summary:Background:The case involves a corporate debtor engaged in the amusement park business admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under IBC 2016. The respondent conducted a raid during the moratorium period, seizing documents, claiming it was part of tax assessment proceedings.Applicant's Argument:The applicant contended that the raid and seizure violated the moratorium order, hindering the resolution process.Respondent's Defense:The respondent justified the raid as part of tax assessment under GST Act, claiming it did not violate the moratorium.Key Legal Points:- The respondent cited court cases to support their actions but failed to establish a direct link to the present case.- The Apex court clarified that authorities can assess taxes during moratorium but cannot initiate recovery proceedings.Decision:The Tribunal found the raid and summons to be in violation of the moratorium order, directing the return of seized documents and setting aside the summon. A compensatory cost of Rs.50,000 was imposed on the respondent, with liberty granted to recover from the responsible officials.Conclusion:The Tribunal's ruling emphasized the importance of upholding the moratorium order to facilitate the resolution process efficiently and protect the authority of the resolution professional. The judgment serves as a reminder of the legal boundaries during insolvency proceedings and the consequences of violating the moratorium order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
