https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443763 A tax demand based on a best judgment assessment and an uncrystallised liability could not be re-agitated in insolvency proceedings where the same claim had already been addressed earlier; the Tribunal held that res judicata and estoppel applied, and the challenge was barred. It further held that statutory first-charge provisions in the tax law yielded to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, so the State's dues could not displace the insolvency distribution framework or be treated as secured debt. Rainbow Papers was confined to its facts and did not confer priority on uncrystallised tax dues. The impugned order was upheld. en-us Wed, 27 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Sep 2023 22:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443763 A tax demand based on a best judgment assessment and an uncrystallised liability could not be re-agitated in insolvency proceedings where the same claim had already been addressed earlier; the Tribunal held that res judicata and estoppel applied, and the challenge was barred. It further held that statutory first-charge provisions in the tax law yielded to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, so the State's dues could not displace the insolvency distribution framework or be treated as secured debt. Rainbow Papers was confined to its facts and did not confer priority on uncrystallised tax dues. The impugned order was upheld. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 27 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443763