2025 (5) TMI 1592

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i Parikh for the petitioner and learned advocate Ms. Maithili Mehta for the respondent. 2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Ms. Maithili Mehta waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent. 3. Having regard to the controversy arising in the present petition in narrow compass, with the consent of learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken for final disposal today. 4. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has challenged recovery notices dated 4.3.2024 and 9.4.2024 issued by the respondent under the provisions of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2017-18 raised for the year under consideration consequent to passing of the penalty order dated 18.10.202....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....under section 270A of the Income Tax Act as well as demand of Rs. 2,02,200/- raised pursuant to penalty order dated 18.10.2021 passed under section 271AAC of the Income Tax Act for the year under consideration coupled with the fact that none of the above order dated 18.10.2021 under section 271AAC nor penalty order under section 270A dated 24.11.2021 were served upon the petitioner. Hence, the present petition. 6. Learned senior advocate Mr. Tushar Hemani has relied upon the decision of the Honourable Apex Court in the case of Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Pvt.Ltd Vs Delweiss Asseet Reconstruction Co. Ltd, reported in (2021) 9 SCC 657 and has argued that once the order under section 31 of the IBC has been passed by the NCLT, Ahmedabad where....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uld be continued. This has been specifically held by the Honourable Apex Court in the case of Vaibhav Goel and another Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and another, reported in 2025 INSC 375 where the judgment in the case of Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Pvt Ltd (supra) has been referred to and demands made by the Income Tax Department were held to be invalid and unenforciable. Para 95 reads as under.: "95. In the result, we answer the questions framed by us as under: (i) That once a resolution plan is duly approved by the Adjudicating Authority under subsection (1) of Section 31, the claims as provided in the resolution plan shall stand frozen and will be binding on the Corporate Debtor and its employees, members, credit....