IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14368 of 2024 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI =================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ✔

==================================================

MAHAN ENERGEN LIMITED Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DCIT CIRCLE 16(1), DELHI ==================================================

Appearance:

MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS MAITHILI D MEHTA(3206) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI Date : 17/04/2026 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI)

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. B. S. Soparkar for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel Ms. Maithili Mehta for the respondent.

2. With the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for hearing, as the issue involved is very short.

3. The petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers :-

“(a) Quash and set aside the impugned notice under Section 148A (b) dated 22.03.2023 at Annexure-A1, Order passed under Section

148A(d) dated 05.04.2023 at Annexure-A2, and consequential notice under Section 148 dated 05.04.2023 at Annexure-A3 to this petition; (b) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, to stay the implementation and operation of the impugned notice under Section 148 dated 05.04.2023 at Annexure-A3 to this petition and consequent assessment proceedings;

(c) Any other and further relief deemed just and proper by granted in the interest of justice;

(d) To provide for the cost of petition.”

4. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

4.1. The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner had filed the return of income under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) for the Assessment Year

2016-17 on 16.03.2017 declaring income of Rs.1,73,790/-.

4.2. The case of the petitioner was selected for complete scrutiny and the assessment was completed on 26.12.2018 accepting the returned income. The case of the petitioner qua Assessment Year 2016-17 was proposed to be reopened by the issuance of a notice dated 05.04.2023 under Section 148 of the Act.

4.3. The petitioner was subjected to the insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”), wherein, a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) was initiated under Section 7 of the IBC, which was admitted by the Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 01.11.2021.

4.4. An Interim Resolution Professional was appointed by the National Company Law Tribunal (for short “Tribunal”), who made a public announcement in accordance with Section 13, 15 and other relevant provisions of the IBC read with the Regulation 6 of the Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Process of Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016, (For short “Regulations, 2016”) thereby inviting claims from the various creditors of the Petitioner.

4.5. Further, under the CIRP, the Resolution Plan of Adani Power Limited for the revival of the petitioner was approved by the Tribunal vide order dated 01.11.2021 under Section 30(6) of the IBC. The said Resolution Plan provided for the waiver and extinguishment of all the unassessed/assessed tax liabilities for the period prior to the Tribunal approval date.

4.6. The respondent has issued the impugned notice dated 05.04.2023, under Section 148 of the Act.

4.7. Challenging the legality of the impugned notice dated 05.04.2023 under Section 148 of the Act and impugned order dated 05.04.2023 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, the petitioner has filed this petition.

5. Learned advocate Mr B.S. Soparkar appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that on the approval of the Resolution Plan under Section 31 of