SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(SC) 15

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.R. Shah, B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.
M/s. Shekhar Resorts Limited (Unit Hotel Orient Taj) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No.8957 of 2022
Decided On : 05-01-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Ms. Charanya Lakshmikumaran, AOR Ms. Apeksha Mehta, Adv. Ms. Mounica Kasturi, Adv. Mr. Karan Sachdev, Adv. Mr. Pranav Mundra, Adv. Ms. Bhavya Shukla, Adv. Ms. Falguni Gupta, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Vikramjit Banerji, ASG Mr. M.K.Maroria AOR Ms. Niranjana Singh Adv Mr. Nachiketa Joshi Adv Mr. Rajan Kumar Choursia Adv Mr. Mohd Akhil Adv Mr. P.V. Yogeswaran Adv. Mr. Siddhartha Sinha, Adv. Mr. Shivam Singhania, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv.

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Under provisions of IBC no payment can be made during period of moratorium.
(2) No party shall be left remediless and whatever grievance parties have raised before court of law, has to be examined on its own merits – No law would compel a person to do the impossible.

Headnote:

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Section 14 – Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 – Service Tax Evasion – Non-deposit of Settlement Amount – Appellant is entitled to benefit of settlement under Scheme, 2019 – Under provisions of IBC no payment could have been made during period of moratorium – Appellant was statutorily restrained/debarred from making any payment – There was statutory disability on part of appellant in making payment during moratorium – If appellant had made any payment during period of moratorium, appellant would have committed breach of provisions of IBC – No party shall be left remediless and whatever grievance parties had raised before court of law, has to be examined on its own merits – No law would compel a person to do the impossible – Appellant cannot be punished for not doing something which was impossible for it to do – High Court while exercising powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India cannot extend the Scheme – However, in present case it is not a case of extension of Scheme by High Court – It is a case of taking remedial measures – High Court has erred in refusing to grant any relief to appellant as prayed – Impugned judgment and order passed by High Court quashed and set aside – Payment of already deposited by appellant be appropriated towards settlement dues under “Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019” and appellant be issued discharge certificate. (Paras 6, 7.1, 7.2, 8, 8.1, 9 and 10)

Facts of the case:

Short question which is posed for consideration before this Court is, whether, when it was impossible for the appellant to deposit the settlement amount in view of the bar and/or restrictions under the IBC, appellant can be punished for no fault of the appellant? In a given case can the appellant be made to suffer for no fault of its own, and be rendered remediless and denied benefit/relief though it was impossible for the appellant to carry out certain acts, namely to deposit the settlement amount during the moratorium.

Findings of Court:

There may be extra ordinary cases which are required to be considered on facts of each case. The Courts are meant to do justice and cannot compel a person to do something which was impossible for him to do.

Result : Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT :

M.R. Shah, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 24.06.2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Writ Tax No.328 of 2021 by which the High Court has dismissed the said writ petition preferred by the appellant herein seeking direction to the respondents for consideration of the case of the petitioner under the scheme “Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019” (hereinafter referred to as the “Scheme of 2019”), the original writ petitioner has preferred the present appeal.

2. The facts leading to the present appeal in nutshell are as under:

That the appellant – company registered with the Service Tax Department was a company engaged in providing hospitality services. The Service Tax Department conducted investigations as to the evasion of service tax by the appellant and issued show cause notices demanding payment of service tax under various categories such as Accommodation in Hotels, Inn, Guest House, Restaurant Services, Mandap Keeper services etc.

2.1 Proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2021 (hereinafter referred to as “IBC”) were initiated against the appellant – Company. The NCLT, Delhi vide order dated 11.09.2018 admitted the application filed by the Financial Creditors of the appellant under Section 7 of the IBC. Thus, on and from 11.09.2018 the corporate insolvency resolution process against the appellant commenced and the appellant was subjected to moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC on and from 11.09.2018. The Committee of Creditors constituted as per the provisions of the IBC, in its 15th meeting, unanimously approved the resolution plan submitted by NCJ Infrastructure Private Limited on 04.06.2019. That thereafter the Scheme of 2019 came to be introduced on 01.09.2019 under Section 125 of the Finance Act, 2019 for availing the benefit of “Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019”. The appellant acting through its Resolution professional submitted an application within the period prescribed under the Scheme 2019. The applicant – company was issued Form No.1 on 27.12.2019. At this stage, it is required to be noted that the last date for making the application under the Scheme 2019 was 31.12.2019. Thus, Form No.1 was issued within the prescribed time limit and the tax dues were computed by the appellant as per the Scheme, 2019. That thereafter Form No.3 was issued by the Designated Committee on 25.02.2020 determining the amount due and payable under the Scheme by the appellant. It appears that as per the said statement for payment of tax dues, the appellant was required to pay Rs.1,24,28,500/-. Under the Scheme the appellant/assessee was required to make the payment as per Form No. 3 within a time period of 30 days. However, in view of the COVID-19 Pandemic, the time to make the payment was extended by the Government upto 30.06.2020.

2.2 That the NCLT approved the Resolution Plan of the successful Resolution applicant - NCJ Infrastructure Private Limited vide order dated 24.07.2020. Thus, on approval of the Resolution Plan by the NCLT the moratorium period came to an end, with the closure of the insolvency proceedings on 24.07.2020. Subsequent to the acceptance of the Resolution Plan by the NCLT, the appellant wrote to the successful resolution applicant and the Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise, Agra intimating them that the resolution process under the IBC had come to an end and that the appellant is ready and willing to make full amount of Rs.1,24,28,500/- as ascertained by the Designated Committee in Form No.3. Vide communication dated 09.10.2020 to the Assistant Commissioner, the appellant explained that the settlement amount under the Scheme, 2019 could not be paid by the appellant before 30.06.2020 due to the legal moratorium imposed upon the company and sought permission to pay the due amount. The Joint Commissioner, Agra vide letter dated 19.10.2020 intimated the appellant th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top