SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Ori) 514

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S. Talapatra, Savitri Ratho, JJ.
M/s. Urvara Agro Biotech Pvt. Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhubaneswar & Anr. – Respondents
Writ Petition (C) Nos. 39995, 1399, 1401, 1402, 10223 of 2021
Decided On : 14-12-2022

Important Points

Authorities cannot initiate criminal prosecution or confiscation proceedings against a company under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for transactions entered into prior to the coming into force of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016.

Subject

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Law - Criminal Prosecution and Confiscation Proceedings

Act Referred

Benami Transactions Prohibition Amendment Act : .
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code : .

Headnote

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code - Criminal Prosecution - Benami Transactions

Fact of the Case:

The court was informed about a review petition seeking review of a judgment that held that authorities cannot initiate criminal prosecution or confiscation proceedings against a company under a resolution process in terms of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for transactions entered into prior to the coming into force of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016.

Finding of the Court:

The court granted an adjournment and listed the case for a later date, allowing the interim order to continue until then.

Issues: Review petition seeking review of a judgment related to criminal prosecution and confiscation proceedings against a company under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was to grant an adjournment and continue the interim order, pending the review petition seeking review of the judgment.

Final Decision: The case was adjourned and listed for a later date, with the interim order to continue until then.

Advocates appeared:
Radheshyam Chimanka, Advocate, A. Kedia, Advocate

JUDGMENT

1. Learned counsel for the Petitioners points out that in Union of India v. M/s. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2022 SC 4558, it has been held that against a Company under a resolution process in terms of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code the concerned authorities cannot initiate or continue criminal prosecution or confiscation proceedings for transactions entered into prior to the coming into force of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 i.e. 25th October, 2016.

2. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue Department informs the Court that a review petition (Diary No.34619 of 2022) seeking review of the above judgment has been filed in the Supreme Court of India on 31st October, 2022 and, therefore, prays for an adjournment.

3. At his request, list on 13th April, 2023. The interim order passed in all the above cases shall continue till then.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top