<?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 (10) TMI 984 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760385</link>
    <description>Pre-acquisition tax dues of a Gram Panchayat that were not lodged during the corporate insolvency resolution process or liquidation could not be recovered from an auction purchaser. The Bombay HC noted that the assets were sold in liquidation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and the sale certificate stated that the transfer was free from encumbrances and levies. Because the creditor did not submit its claim despite public notices and the IBC framework requires claims to be invited, collated and adjudicated within the process, the prior-period dues stood extinguished and could not be enforced against the purchaser. The demand notices for tax dues before acquisition were therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 Oct 2024 17:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=774692" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (10) TMI 984 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760385</link>
      <description>Pre-acquisition tax dues of a Gram Panchayat that were not lodged during the corporate insolvency resolution process or liquidation could not be recovered from an auction purchaser. The Bombay HC noted that the assets were sold in liquidation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and the sale certificate stated that the transfer was free from encumbrances and levies. Because the creditor did not submit its claim despite public notices and the IBC framework requires claims to be invited, collated and adjudicated within the process, the prior-period dues stood extinguished and could not be enforced against the purchaser. The demand notices for tax dues before acquisition were therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760385</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>