<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (5) TMI 1151 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753098</link>
    <description>A statutory first charge under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was treated as creating a secured claim for insolvency purposes, while claims under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 were not elevated to secured status because no pari materia first-charge provision existed. Tax assessments made after commencement of CIRP were held subject to the moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and assessments or recovery steps taken after liquidation were barred by Section 33(5). The authority could determine tax liability during the moratorium, but it could not enforce recovery or continue attachment against the corporate debtor&#039;s assets.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2024 21:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=754234" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 1151 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753098</link>
      <description>A statutory first charge under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was treated as creating a secured claim for insolvency purposes, while claims under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 were not elevated to secured status because no pari materia first-charge provision existed. Tax assessments made after commencement of CIRP were held subject to the moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and assessments or recovery steps taken after liquidation were barred by Section 33(5). The authority could determine tax liability during the moratorium, but it could not enforce recovery or continue attachment against the corporate debtor&#039;s assets.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753098</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>