TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (5) TMI 732
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Janab Mohammed Ajmal, Member (Judicial) This is an Application by the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor seeking certain directions against the Respondent inter alia not to proceed with any penalty proceedings against the Corporate Debtor. 2. Briefly stated the facts leading to the Application are thus: i. This Tribunal by order dated 31.01.2019 in the quoted Company Petition u/s 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code) initiated Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of the Corporate Debtor. Thereunder this Authority appointed the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and inter alia declared moratorium u/s 14 of the Code. ii. In course of the CIRP the Applicant took steps under the IBBI (Insolvenc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....porate Debtor as to why the order of eviction would not be passed. vi. No action was taken by the SEZ Authority till 05.09.2017. The Specified Officer of the Respondent on 05.09.2017 assessed that the Corporate Debtor was in arrears of Rs.. 2,98,37,311/- towards duty as per the Bond-cum-Legal Undertaking in terms of the SEZ Rules on the balance capital goods imported by it. Apparently, the Corporate Debtor did not comply with the notices. The Respondent on 11.02.2019 issued a notice u/s 11(2) of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulations) Act, 1992 (the Foreign Trade Act) to the Corporate Debtor indicating various violations by the Corporate Debtor to show cause within 15 days as to why penal action shall not be taken for non-complian....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mitted that the action initiated by him was much prior to the commencement of the CIRP process and upon receipt of the letter dated 26.02.2019 the Respondent on 11.06.2019 submitted its claim towards the Customs duty and Estate dues. Since the notice dated 11.02.2019 was issued prior to the Respondent becoming aware of the commencement of the CIRP, the action would not amount to the contravention of the moratorium. The proceedings contemplated under the notice dated 11.02.2019 had remained unadjudicated and no proceedings has been taken up. Since there is no contravention of the provisions of the Code the Application deserves to be dismissed. 4. In support of his contentions the Respondent has relied on the following decisions: i. Varrsa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hall by order declare moratorium for prohibiting all of the following, namely: - (a) the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgement, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority; (b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing off by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest therein; (c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its property including any action under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002); (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....circumstances as may be specified.] [(3) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to - [(a) such transactions, agreements or other arrangement as may be notified by the Central Government in consultation with any financial sector regulator or any other authority;] (b) a surety in a contract of guarantee to a corporate debtor.] (4) The order of moratorium shall have effect from the date of such order till the completion of the corporate insolvency resolution process: Provided that where at any time during the corporate insolvency resolution process period, if the Adjudicating Authority approves the resolution plan under sub-section (1) of section 31 or passes an order for liquidation of corporate debtor under section ....