https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769317 Bombay HC held that tax authorities lacked jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 73 of CGST Act, 2017 against a company whose resolution plan was approved under Section 31(1) of IBC, 2016. The court ruled that once a resolution plan is approved, only debts included in the plan remain payable, and all other dues from the pre-approval period stand extinguished. Since the impugned order related to FY 2019-20 and the resolution plan was approved on 26.10.2020, the tax claim was invalid. The show cause notice and order under Section 73 CGST Act were quashed, and the petition was allowed. en-us Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Apr 2025 09:09:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769317 Bombay HC held that tax authorities lacked jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 73 of CGST Act, 2017 against a company whose resolution plan was approved under Section 31(1) of IBC, 2016. The court ruled that once a resolution plan is approved, only debts included in the plan remain payable, and all other dues from the pre-approval period stand extinguished. Since the impugned order related to FY 2019-20 and the resolution plan was approved on 26.10.2020, the tax claim was invalid. The show cause notice and order under Section 73 CGST Act were quashed, and the petition was allowed. Case-Laws GST Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769317