2020 (11) TMI 355

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nted by the Resolution Professional Shri Bijoy Prabhakaran Pulipra, an Insolvency Professional seeking to set aside Annexure A3 to the extent of rejection of claim of the applicant by allowing the Annexure A1 claim of the applicant in full. 2. The brief facts leading to this MA is as under: The applicant a statutory authority under the Government of Kerala filed the present MA as an operational creditor. The Insolvency Application Nos. TIBA/11/KOB/2019 & IBA/28/KOB/2019 filed under Section 9 of the IBC has been admitted by this Tribunal on 16.10.2019 and the respondent herein was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional and later reappointed as Resolution Professional. The Corporate Debtor PVS Memorial Hospital Private Limited is ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ment of non-filers of returns. Different notices (18 Nos) envisaged under Section 46 was issued from April, 2018 to September, 2019. Based on that only the Resolution Professional admitted the claim at the first instance. Since the aforesaid 18 notices have not been challenged under the statute by the Corporate Debtor, the Resolution Professional cannot now reduce the amount and that the Resolution Professional has no adjudicatory power in respect of GST claim. 3. In order to fortify his contention that the Resolution Professional has no adjudicatory power in respect of the GST Claim, the learned counsel for the applicant produced a decision of the Hon'ble NCLAT in the case of Navneet Kumar Gupta Vs. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (CA (A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....b-Regulation (1), when he comes across additional information warranting such revision. It is further stated that on 13th July, 2020, the suspended Manging Director of the Corporate Debtor informed the RP that the amount charged by the GST Department is exorbitantly high as the GST to be charged only on certain heads of income and not on the total turnover of the Corporate Debtor. Hence the Respondent RP re-assessed the clam of the applicant with the assistance of the Internal Auditor of the Corporate Debtor. On such evaluation the amount to be paid as GST worked out as Rs. 1,06,09,299/-. As per Notification No.9/2017-Integrated TA Rate dated 28.6.2017 issued by the Government of India, the healthcare services by a clinical establishment or....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed the full amount, as per Regulation 14(2) of the CIRP Regulations, the RP can revise the amounts of claims admitted, including the estimates of claims made under Sub-Regulation (1) when he comes across additional information warranting such revision, This additional information he has received from the suspended Managing Director on 13th Jul, 2020 that the amount charged by the GST Department is not correct, as the GST is to be charged only on certain heads of income and not on total turn over of the Corporate Debtor. After re-assessing the amount payable by the Corporate Debtor with the assistance of the Internal Auditor of the Corporate Debtor, the amount worked out to be Rs. 1,06,09,299, which fact has been intimated to the applicant. ....