Point of Law - NCLAT judgment in holding that claims that may exist apart from those decided on merits by the resolution professional and by the Adjudicating Authority/Appellate Tribunal can now be decided by an appropriate forum in terms of Section 60(6) of the Code, also militates against the rationale of Section 31 of the Code.

JUDGMENT AND ORDER:

(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)

Heard Mr. S.Niranjan Reddy, learned senior counsel for the petitioners and Ms.Mamatha Chowdary, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners seek quashing of notices dated 22.09.2019, 21.10.2019 and 30.10.2019 issued by respondent Nos.2 and 3 for the assessment year 2017-18 as being illegal and non-est and further seek a direction to the said respondents not to reopen their claims which were settled in insolvency proceedings.

3. Petitioner No.1 is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of paper manufacturing. Similar is the status of petitioner No.2.

4. M/s. Rama Road Lines and others had filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) as operational creditor for initiating corporate insolvency resolution process of petitioner No.1. The said application was admitted on 18.09.2017 by the National Company Law Tribunal (briefly, ‘the Tribunal’ hereinafter). By virtue of order of the Tribunal, Section 13 of IBC came into play and moratorium was ordered. As per Section 21 of the IBC, a committee of creditors was constituted from amongst the financial creditors of the corporate debtor i.e. petitioner No.1.

5. Thereafter, the resolution professional made a public announcement on 25.09.2017 inviting claims from all the creditors. It is stated that respondents did not submit claims before the resolution professional. As part of the resolution process, prospective resolution applicants were invited to present their resolution plans for the corporate debtor i.e. petitioner No.1. Petitioner No.2 as the resolution applicant submitted its resolution plan on 12.02.2018, which was thereafter revised pursuant to discussions held with the committee of creditors. The said resolution plan was revised from time to time as sought for by the creditors. The final resolution plan was submitted by petitioner No.2 on 30.04.2018. The same was approved by the committee of creditors and it was approved by the Tribunal, vide its order dated 19.07.2018.

6. According to the petitioners, respondent No.2 had ample opportunity to submit claims before the resolution professional. But it failed to do so. Be that as it may, the resolution plan as approved by the Tribunal vide order dated 19.07.2018, dealt with the various claims made against the corporate debtor i.e. petitioner No.1. As per the approved resolution plan, the total claim of the operational creditors of the corporate debtor was quantified at Rs.95.71 crores and the payment as per the resolution plan was fixed at Rs.9.50 crores.

7. Petitioner No.1 had filed return for the assessment year 2017-18 on 17.10.2018. Thereafter respondent No.2 issued notice dated 22.09.2019 under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (briefly, ‘the Act’ hereinafter) read with Rule 12E of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (briefly, ‘the Rules’ hereinafter). Responding to the said notice, petitioner No.1 stated in the letter dated 14.10.2019 that as the resolution plan has been approved by the Tribunal, all proceedings and claims arising from dues prior to approval of resolution plan stood discharged by virtue of Section 31(1) of the IBC. In addition, petitioner No.1 also informed respondent No.2 that the factory remained closed from September 2014 onwards due to severe financial crisis; it was also stated that there were no sales and purchase transactions recorded during the assessment year 2017-18.

8. Without considering the reply of petitioner No.1, respondent No.3 again sent notice under Section 142(1) of the Act on 22.10.2019 calling upon petitioner No.1 to furnish the accounts for the assessment year 2017-18 as well as details regarding its immovable assets. This was followed by another notice issued by respondent No.3 on 30.10.2019.

9. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition has been filed seeking the reliefs