<?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>2025 (5) TMI 319 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770047</link>
    <description>The HC held that a writ petition filed through an authorized representative was maintainable, rejecting the municipal corporation&#039;s preliminary objection. Regarding recovery of government dues, the court applied the SC precedent in Ghanshyam Mishra &amp;amp; Sons, ruling that all statutory dues owed to local authorities for periods prior to resolution plan approval under Section 31 of the IBC stand extinguished if not included in the plan. The municipal corporation&#039;s property tax claims for the pre-approval period were therefore extinguished by operation of law, though assessment for subsequent periods remained permissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 May 2025 09:58:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=819757" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 319 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770047</link>
      <description>The HC held that a writ petition filed through an authorized representative was maintainable, rejecting the municipal corporation&#039;s preliminary objection. Regarding recovery of government dues, the court applied the SC precedent in Ghanshyam Mishra &amp;amp; Sons, ruling that all statutory dues owed to local authorities for periods prior to resolution plan approval under Section 31 of the IBC stand extinguished if not included in the plan. The municipal corporation&#039;s property tax claims for the pre-approval period were therefore extinguished by operation of law, though assessment for subsequent periods remained permissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770047</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>