AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
CA-1316(PB)/2019:-
The prayer made in this application is to stay the proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961 continued by the non-applicant-respondent No. 1. A further prayer has also been made to set aside the orders of demand dated 10.12.2018 and 18.06.2019 passed by Income Tax Department imposing penalty under Section 271(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the company in liquidation-corporate debtor. The aforesaid orders have been passed during operation of the period of liquidation, which was passed on 16.11.2018 under Section 33(5) of the Code and continues to operate.
The Income Tax Department could not have passed any order raising demand or imposing penalty in respect of the company in liquidation-corporate debtor. The issue is covered by the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Monnet Ispat and Energy Ltd. (Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 6483/2018 decided on 10.08.2018).
Notice of the application was issued and an affidavit of service has also been filed showing that non-applicant-respondents were served on 19.07.2019 and despite service no one has put in appearance to oppose the prayer made by the liquidator.
In view of the above, we find merit in the application and set aside the orders passed by Income Tax Department as it interferes with the liquidation proceedings and violates the provisions of Section 33(5) of the Code.
The application stands disposed of in the above terms.
CA-921(PB)/2019:-
In response to the application, the ex.-Director have filed the response showing that some of beneficiaries of the corporate debtor have been conducting business with the corporate debtor and in proof thereof some photocopies of the cheques have been attached. A copy of the affidavit has been furnished to the counsel for the liquidator and he requests for some time to go through the contents of the affidavit and the cheques because a large number of beneficiaries have refused any relationship with the corporate debtor.
The service affidavit filed by the liquidator shows that the service on beneficiaries has been effected as is evident from page 3 and the same reads as under:-
RESPONDENT
SERVICE MODE
SERVICE REPORT
Respondent No. 14
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 10.06.2019.
Respondent No. 22
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 10.06.2019
Respondent No. 27
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 10.06.2019
Respondent No. 28
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 08.06.2019
Respondent No. 29
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 21.06.2019
Respondent No. 30
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 13.06.2019
Respondent No. 31
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 08.06.2019
Respondent No. 34
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 18.06.2019
Respondent No. 38
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 10.06.2019
Respondent No. 50
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 11.06.2019
Respondent No. 50
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 11.06.2019
Respondent No. 60
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 22.06.2019
Respondent No. 62
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 12.06.2019
Respondent No. 63
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Served on 10.06.2019
However, some of the non-applicant-respondents-beneficiaries have not been served and the details have been furnished as under:-
RESPONDENT
SERVICE MODE
SERVICE REPORT
Respondent No. 7
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back due to insufficient address.
Respondent No. 9
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back as addressee cannot be located.
Respondent No. 13
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back due to insufficient address.
Respondent No. 16
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back with remark . addressee left without instructions.
Respondent No. 21
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back.
Respondent No. 24
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back due to insufficient address.
Respondent No. 26
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back as addressee could not be located.
Respondent No. 32
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back due to insufficient address.
Respondent No. 44
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back due to insufficient address.
Respondent No. 45
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back due to insufficient address.
Respondent No. 46
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back as addressee could not found at the address.
Respondent No. 49
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back due to insufficient address.
Respondent No. 51
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back as addressee left without instructions.
Respondent No. 57
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back due to insufficient address.
Respondent No. 59
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back as no such person was found at the address.
Respondent No. 65
By Speed Post issued on 06.06.2019
Returned back.
Let necessary steps be taken to serve the unserved respondents in the meanwhile.
List for further consideration on 03.09.2019.