AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 1002
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ution Process began. 3. The Respondent No. 1 is a statutory authority/Government body constituted and now governed under the provision of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and further as successor office that was governed and constituted under Maharashtra Value Tax Act, 2002. The Respondent No. 2 is also a statutory authority which was governed and constituted under the Maharashtra Value Tax Act, 2002. At present the Respondent No. 1 is pursing all the earlier assignment, litigations as well as all statutory duties on and behalf of the Respondent No. 2. 4. It is also stated that the period prescribed for the CIRP was extended by this Adjudicating Authority and which ended on 5th April, 2018. Brief facts and issues involved in this present IA are as under: a. It is submitted that a public notice was issued by the Interim Resolution Professional as well as the Resolution Professional by calling upon the public at large to submit their claim as per prescribed format towards the dues. In response to the above notice the office of the Respondent No. 2 through their Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax has submitted its claim by and filed Form B to the Interim R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to be dismissed by the Hon'ble NCLAT vide Order dated 20.03.2019. Being arrived with the same the Department has further preferred an appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and it was reported to be pending. 9. The applicant also referred to a previous Order of this Tribunal dated 11th October, 2019 by allowing the Miscellaneous Application No. 1305 of 2019 has clarified that the successful Resolution Applicant are not entitled to make any payment to the claimant prior to CIRP and approval of Resolution Plan by this Adjudicating Authority and after the transfer of the Corporate Debtor to the Resolution Applicant. 10. It is submitted that despite the fact that the Respondent No. 2 purported claim is become redundant by the Order of the Hon'ble NCLAT and there has been no stay on implementation of the Order dated 19th April, 2018 from higher forum and further the Applicant through its successful Resolution Professional have been executing the Resolution Plain in its utmost priority since last more than 2 years. 11. It is further contended that despite the aforesaid facts, the Respondent No. 1 on behalf of the Respondent No. 2 passed the following Order viz.: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing Consumer Goods ("FMCG") products and into inter-state sales, purchase and distribution. It is submitted that prior to the approval of the Resolution Plain, there were huge outstanding due and payable to the other operational creditors, who details are more particularly set out in the Information Memorandum and accordingly, the Applicant as per the Final Resolution Plan, is liable to make payment to the Operational Creditors in respect of their dues and issue appropriate C Form, failing which the cost and the money payable through the Applicant would be enhance ay the per particular states Sales Tax Laws, hence, the Applicant are in need of Form C to be issued, which is required by the Seller, which is subsequently required to be approved by the Respondents failing which the Applicant would suffer hardship in implementation of the Resolution Plan. 14. Therefore, the aforesaid reason the impugned demands raised by the Respondents on 4th September, 2020 (i) for the period from 1st April, 2015 till 31st March, 2016; (ii) for the period from 1st April, 2015 till 31st March, 2016; (iii) for the period from 1st April, 2016 till 31st March, 2017; and (iv) for the period from 1st Apr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntioned therein, are bad in law and ought to be quashed, which Respondents have withheld such C forms in view of its four demands raised by Order dated 04.09.2020. 18. It is contended that issuance of C forms to the Applicant is governed by the MVAT Act, and the Rules and trade circulars issued thereunder. The reliefs sought by the Applicant regarding issuance of C Forms to the Applicant and the quashing of the demands raised by these Respondents, therefore beyond the scope and ambit of this Adjudicating Authority and jurisdiction of this Tribunal. The Respondents has relied on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal 6350 of 2019 (Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Abhilash Lal & Ors. and in Civil Appeal 9170 of 2019 (Embassy Property Development Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Karnataka, paragraph 52). 19. It is submitted that the Respondents entered in to various correspondence with the applicant Corporate Debtor/or Resolution Professional with regard to the claim of the Respondents. However, for the reasons not disclosed to the Respondents they were not made party to the proceedings pertaining to the approval of Plan. 20. It is further contended tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sfer/consignment transfer has been disclosed appropriately in the return for the period vis-à-vis the said turnover mentioned in the SOR. c. Whether the applicant dealer has any outstanding dues under MVAT Act 2002, CST Act 1956 or any other allied Act administered by the Sales Tax Department or/and has any return related dues. d. Whether the applicant dealer (If he is liable to file Audit Report in Form No. 704 as provided under section 61 of the MVAT Act 2002) has filed Audit Report in Form 704 for all the periods starting from 01.04.2008 till the period for which due date for submission of Audit report is over." In this case there is violation of clause 5 C of the said trade circular i.e. the applicant has not cleared all its outstanding dues towards MVAT as well as CST. 23. The issue in hand is pertaining to outstanding amount of Rs. 125,02,97,513/- which is due to these Respondents and are public monies and have to be protected until final orders on the dispute are passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. In rejoinder and rebuttal of the Respondent Department the applicant has stated as under:- 24. Applicant Submits that the perusa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f 2018 passed by this Tribunal (which is at page No. 235-266 of the Miscellaneous Application) and the Order dated 20th March, 2019 passed by the Hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (which is at page No. 287 to 310 of the Miscellaneous Application) clearly makes all the claim of the Respondent prior to 2nd May, 2018 are redundant and now the Applicant is only liable to make payment as committed in the Resolution Plan. It is further pertinent to note that the purported demand made by the Respondent on 4th September, 2020 is in violation of Section 31 of the IBC Code as well as Order dated 19th April, 2018 passed in Miscellaneous Application No. 35 of 2018. In view of the aforesaid and even otherwise, I deny that the Applicant is liable to make any payment, as alleged or for the reasons alleged by the Respondent through the purported demands. c. At paragraph No. 7 of the Affidavit in Reply, the Respondents has alleged that the Respondents were not a party to the CIRP Process. Despite the fact been clearly in the knowledge of the Respondents, it is reiterated that the Applicant is a Successful Resolution Professional appointed as per Order dated 19t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cant deals into Fast Moving Consumer Goods, and have huge inter-estate trade and business, hence continuously requires the Forms C otherwise, their operations and trade is huge affected and hence withholding the same in view of the purported demands dated 4th September, 2020, is continuously creating huge hardship at the end of the Applicants. 26. Further Applicant in furtherance of his case relied upon the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Ultra Tech Nathdwara Cement Limited v. Union of India reported in have clearly held that Order passed by Hon'ble NCLT shall be binding upon the Respondents. It is submitted that the facts of Ultra Teach Nathdwara Cement Limited (Supra) are identical to the facts of the present case and Respondents' Department was a Respondents therein. The copy of the judgment annexed as Exhibit "A" to the Rejoinder in the case of Ultra Tech Nathdwara Cement Limited v. Union of India reported in. 27. In view of the facts enumerated in the Miscellaneous Application and further set out in this Affidavit in Rejoinder, the Applicant submits that reliefs prayed for in the Miscellaneous Application be granted. 28. We have gone through th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....person to whom a debt is owed and includes a Financial Creditor, an Operational Creditor, a Secured Creditor, an Unsecured Creditor and a Decree Holder. "Operational Creditor" has been defined to mean a person to whom an Operational debt is owed and includes any person to whom such debt has been legally assigned or transferred. "Operational Debt" has been defined to mean a claim in respect of the provision of goods or services including employment or a debt in respect of the payment of dues arising under any law for the time being in force and payable to the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority. 91. It is a cardinal principle of law, that a statute has to be read as a whole. Harmonious construction of Sub-Section (10) of Section 3 of the IB Code read with Sub-Section (20) and (21) of Section 5 thereof would reveal, that even a claim in respect of dues arising under any law for the time being in force and payable to the Central Government, any State Government or any Local authority would come within the ambit of "Operational Creditor". The Central Government, any State Government or any local authority to whom an Operational Deb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Corporate Debtor and its employees, members, creditors, including the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority, guarantors and other stakeholders. On the date of approval of Resolution Plan by the Adjudicating Authority, all such claims, which are not a part of Resolution Plan, shall stand extinguished and no person will be entitled to initiate or continue any proceedings in respect to claim, which is not part of the Resolution Plan. Consequently, all the dues including the statutory dues owed to the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority, if not part of the Resolution Plan, shall stand extinguished and no proceedings in respect of such dues of the period prior to the date on which the Adjudicating Authority grants its approval under Section 31 could be continued. 29. By following the above stated Judicial Precedents which is now law of the land and binding upon us under the Article 141 read with Article 144 of the constitution of India. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the legal issues involved in the present matter have already been dealt with and clarified and well settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court ....