TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 1141
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder of the ITAT passed in ITA No.149/CTK/2015, charged interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, thereby enhancing the demand for the Assessment Year 2010-11. I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE: 2. For the Assessment Year 2010-11, a return of income supported by Statement of Accounts along with Audit Report in Form 10CCB were filed by the Petitioner No.1. 3. The Assessing officer assessed and raised a demand of Rs. 6,98,24,230.00 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. Being aggrieved by the order of assessment, the Petitioner filed first Appeal before the CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar. However, the CIT(A)-1 decided in favour of revenue. Being aggrieved by such order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it would not be appropriate to adjourn the matter. Consequently, for the purpose of verification as to whether this amount of Rs. 6,98,24,230/- being the demand for the assessment year 2010-2011 is included in the amount of Rs. 14,26,69,327.27, the issue is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification. If the amount of Rs. 6,98,24,230/- is included in the amount of Rs. 14,26,69,327.27, then, there is nothing further to be done because the amount would be paid according to the resolution plan which has been approved by the NCLT. If the amount of Rs. 14,26,69,327.27 does not include in the said amount, then in view of the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Monnet Ispat and Energy Umited (supra) as also the decision of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ory mandate as well as principles of natural justice. 10. The Assessee Company after filing of the Income Tax Return had paid Rs. 5,55,42,427.00 and Rs. 45,28,927.00, total amounting to Rs. 6,00,71,354.00 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 11. It is therefore submitted that the order dated 07.02.2023 passed u/s 254 of the Income Tax Act giving effect to the order of the ITAT passed in ITA No.149/CTK/2015 and the Notice of Demand under section 156 dt. 07.02.2023 are liable to be quashed and the Petitioner be refunded an amount of Rs. 5,55,42,427.00 and Rs. 45,28,927.00, total amounting to Rs. 6,00,71,354.00. Hence this Writ Petition. II. SUBMISSIONS OF OPPOSITE PARTIES: 12. Per contra, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Opp. P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ITAT for re-verification. The impugned order was passed only after considering the response of the petitioner wherein the amount of Rs. 6,98,24,230/- which was frozen by NCLT was reduced. 16. As per the order of the learned NCLT, amount of Rs. 6,98,24,230/- stands frozen but the above order of learned NCLT does not bar any other demands especially demand raised after the order. The petitioner moved petition before the learned ITAT against the 143(3) order dated 31/03/2013 passed by Opp. Party No-2 wherein the appeal of the petitioner was also dismissed before the learned CIT(A). As mentioned above, the petitioner moved petition before ITAT on the issues of addition made vide the 143(3) order dated 31/03/2013, which were restored by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ional panel or other authority". Section 14 of the IBC does not differentiate between any proceedings, whether they are assessment, quasi-judicial or judicial in nature. In fact, a moratorium is imposed on all proceedings irrespective of the nature. 20. As per Section 31(1), once a resolution plan is duly approved by the adjudicating authority, the claims as provided in the resolution plan shall stand frozen and will be binding on the 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 ....