https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764442 The ITAT Delhi ruled on penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) against a dissolved company where NCLT had approved a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Tribunal held that section 14 of IBC provides clear moratorium protection, preventing institution or continuation of proceedings against the debtor once insolvency commences. Citing Ghanshyam Manz Retails case, the Tribunal noted that approved resolution plans freeze claims and bind all stakeholders. Since the resolution plan was pending finalization, the matter was remanded to the AO under newly inserted section 156A for appropriate action. The appeals were partly allowed. en-us Wed, 08 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jan 2025 17:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764442 The ITAT Delhi ruled on penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) against a dissolved company where NCLT had approved a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Tribunal held that section 14 of IBC provides clear moratorium protection, preventing institution or continuation of proceedings against the debtor once insolvency commences. Citing Ghanshyam Manz Retails case, the Tribunal noted that approved resolution plans freeze claims and bind all stakeholders. Since the resolution plan was pending finalization, the matter was remanded to the AO under newly inserted section 156A for appropriate action. The appeals were partly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764442