TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 125
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tcy Code, 2016. A Resolution Plan was subsequently approved by the NCLT on 01.02.2019, which was affirmed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). The Civil Appeal filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court challenging the approval was dismissed in Civil Appeal No. 5344 of 2019 dated 15.07.2019. 3. The petitioner challenges the recovery notice dated 05.10.2021 issued by the respondent, wherein interest under Section 7Q and damages under Section 14B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 were levied. The petitioner was directed to remit a sum of Rs. 33,67,817/- within ten days, failing which recovery proceedings under Paragraph 32(a) of the EPF Scheme, 1952 were to be initiated. The writ petiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shra and Sons Private Limited v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited, (2021) 9 SCC 657, to the facts of the present case. 7. In response, the petitioner submitted that the dues sought to be recovered were not part of the claims lodged before the Resolution Professional and were not provided for in the Approved Resolution Plan. Hence, all such claims stood extinguished. Reliance was placed on Ruchi Soya Industries Limited v. Union of India, (2022) 6 SCC 343, wherein it was held that once a resolution plan is approved under Section 31(1) of the IBC, 2016, all claims not forming part of the plan stand frozen. 8. The petitioner further relied on decisions of this Court in Aginiti Industrial Parks Pvt. Ltd. v. Superintendent of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....legislation intended to facilitate the revival of corporate debtors through maximisation of asset value and resolution of claims in a time-bound manner. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Embassy Property Developments Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Karnataka, (2020) 13 SCC 308, has held that High Courts ought to refrain from exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 in matters falling within the purview of the NCLT/NCLAT, except in exceptional circumstances, namely: i. where the liquidator or authority acts wholly without jurisdiction; ii. where there is a blatant violation of the principles of natural justice; or iii. where the action is manifestly arbitrary or actuated by mala fides. 12.The case at hand does not fall withi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reported in 2024 INSC 297, observed as follows: "29. It could thus clearly be seen that the Court has carved out certain exceptions when a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution could be entertained in spite of availability of an alternative remedy. Some of them are thus: (i) where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the enactment in question; (ii) it has acted in defiance of the fundamental principles of judicial procedure; (iii) it has resorted to invoke the provisions which are repealed; and (iv) when an order has been passed in total violation of the principles of natural justice. 30. It has however been clarified that the High Court wil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....caution, care, and circumspection." 14.Just as the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act and the SARFAESI Act are recognised as complete and self-contained codes, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is likewise a comprehensive legislation. The Supreme Court, in Embassy Property Developments Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Karnataka, (2020) 13 SCC 308, made the following observations regarding the nature and scope of the Code: "11. It is beyond any pale of doubt that IBC, 2016 is a complete Code in itself. As observed by this Court in M/s Innoventive Industries Limited vs. ICICI Bank,3 it is an exhaustive code on the subject matter of insolvency in relation to corporate entities and others. It is also true that IBC, 2016 is a single Un....