https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760551 The ITAT Mumbai remanded an income tax demand case back to the Assessing Officer following insolvency proceedings. The tribunal held that Section 14 of IBC prohibits continuation of proceedings once moratorium is declared and insolvency commencement date is set. Since a registered Insolvency Professional was appointed by NCLT and no representative appeared for the assessee, the tribunal referenced the Supreme Court decision in Ghanshyam Mishra case regarding resolution plan binding effects. As the resolution plan was pending finalization, the tribunal directed the AO to take necessary steps before NCLT under newly inserted Section 156A of the Income Tax Act. en-us Fri, 18 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Oct 2024 16:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760551 The ITAT Mumbai remanded an income tax demand case back to the Assessing Officer following insolvency proceedings. The tribunal held that Section 14 of IBC prohibits continuation of proceedings once moratorium is declared and insolvency commencement date is set. Since a registered Insolvency Professional was appointed by NCLT and no representative appeared for the assessee, the tribunal referenced the Supreme Court decision in Ghanshyam Mishra case regarding resolution plan binding effects. As the resolution plan was pending finalization, the tribunal directed the AO to take necessary steps before NCLT under newly inserted Section 156A of the Income Tax Act. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 18 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760551