TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 745
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 147 read with Section 250, 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and bearing DIN No. ITBA/AST/S/147/2025-26/1087248328(1) being the impugned order [at Annexure-A] and (B) Your Lordships be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside Demand Notice dated 12.03.2026 ITBA/AST/S/156/2025-26/1087248431(1) being the impugned Demand [at Annexure-B];" 4. The brief facts of the case are as follows: 4.1. The petitioner No. 1 is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 on 31.01.2005 with its Corporate Identification Number being U26920GJ2005PLC045383, having its registered office at Survey Nos. 1071-74, Nandasan-Mehsana Road, National Highway No. 8, Kadi, Mehsana, Nandasan, Gujarat-380706. The petitioner No. 1 was engaged in the business of ceramics and manufacturing. The petitioner No. 2 is a director and shareholder of the petitioner No. 1. The petitioner No. 1 had filed the return of income under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") for the Assessment Year 2011-12. 4.2. While the management and control of the petitioner No. 1 was under its erstwhile promoters, an Assessment Order dated 17.12.2018....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the passing of the Plan Approval Order, explicitly stating inter alia that under Section 31 of the IBC, all pre-CIRP claims and statutory dues not included in the plan stood permanently extinguished. 4.8. Thereafter, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) passed an order dated 27.11.2024 in the pending appeal, setting aside the first Assessment Order dated 17.12.2018 and remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. 4.9. Thereafter, the respondent No. 1 issued a Notice dated 03.11.2025 under Section 142(1) of the Act upon the petitioner No. 1. In response, the petitioner No. 1 issued a Communication dated 08.11.2025 explaining the IBC immunity and the factum of the approval of the Resolution Plan. Despite the same, the respondents issued a Communication dated 16.12.2025 rejecting the petitioner's argument. 4.10. The respondents thereafter issued a Show Cause Notice dated 20.02.2026 proposing an addition of INR 2,01,71,445/- as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act and INR 15,414/- as interest income for the Assessment Year 2011-12, ignoring the statutory 'Clean Slate' protections. In response, the petitioner No. 1 issued a C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....S / TCS, whether admitted or not, due or contingent, whether part of above claim of Income-tax authorities or not, whether part of Tax due diligence finding or not, asserted or unasserted, crystallized or not crystallized, known or unknown, secured or unsecured, disputed or undisputed, present or future, in relation to any period prior to the Effective Date pursuant to this Resolution Plan, shall stand extinguished by virtue of the order of the NCLT approving this Resolution Plan and the Corporate Debtor and Resolution Applicants shall not be liable to pay any amount against such demand/ claim. All assessments/appellate or other proceedings pending in case of the Corporate Debtor, on the date of the order of NCLT relating to the period prior to that date, shall stand terminated and all consequential liabilities, if any, shall be deleted and shall be considered to be not payable by the Corporate Debtor by virtue of the order of the NCLT, All notices proposing to initiate any proceedings against the Corporate Debtor in relation to the period prior to the date of the NCLT order and pending on that date, shall be considered deleted and shall not be proceeded against. Post the order of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....porate debtor. This the successful resolution applicant does on a fresh slate, as has been pointed out by us hereinabove. For these reasons, NCLAT judgment must also be set aside on this count." 8. In the case of Ghanshyam Mishra and Sons Pvt. Ltd. (Supra), the Apex Court has categorically held as under:- "102.1 That once a resolution plan is duly approved by the adjudicating authority under sub-section (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, 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 a claim, which is not part of the resolution plan. 102.2 The 2019 Amendment to Section 31 IBC is clarificatory and declaratory in nature and therefore will be effective from the date on which IBC has come into effect. 102.3 Consequently all....