DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s Punj Lloyd Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2109/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4012 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 07-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURENDER PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJAT JAIN F

Judgement Text

DCIT- CC-25, NEW DELHI V. PUNJ LLYOD LTD. / I.T.A.N O.2109/DEL/2017/A.Y.:2011-12PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ANDSHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . . /. I.T.A NO.2109/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 25, NEW DELHI VS. M/S. PUNJ LLYOD LTD., PUNJ LLYOD HOUSE,17-18, NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI PAN: AAACP 0305 Q APPELLANT / RESPONDENT /ASSESSEE BY SHRI RAJAT JAIN, F CA & SHRI AKSHAT JAIN, FCA /REVENUE BY SHRI SUREN DER PAL, SR. D.R. / DATE OF HEARING: 11.11.2019 /PRONOUNCEMENT ON 11.11.2019 /O R D E R PER O. P. MEENA,AM: 1. THIS APPEALBY THE REVENUE ISDIRECTED AGAINST THE OR DER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-44, NEW DELHI, DATED 05.10.2016FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THIS APPEAL MIGHT BE DISPOSED-OFF IN THE LINE OF DE CISION OF TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. PUNJ LLYOD LIMITED V. DCIT CC2- AND VI CE VERSA IN I.T.A.NO. 5889,5890,5891 AND 6084,6085, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2004-05 , 2005- 06 AND 2006-07 DATED 25.09.2019 PASSED BY ITAT-F, B ENCH NEW DELHI. A COPY OF ORDER IS FILED AND PLACED ON RECORD. 3. THE LD. SR. D.R. HAS ADMITTED THAT ISSUE IS COVERED BY ABOVE TRIBUNAL ORDER (SUPRA). DCIT- CC-25, NEW DELHI V. PUNJ LLYOD LTD. / I.T.A.N O.2109/DEL/2017/A.Y.:2011-12PAGE 2 OF 3 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS G IVEN ITS FINDINGS VIDE ORDER DATED 25.09.2019 WHICH ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDE R: 2.AT THE TIME OF HEARING VIDE LETTER DATED 31.07.2 019, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBU NAL PRINCIPAL BRANCH, NEW DELHI VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 08.03.2019 H AS INITIATED THE CORPORATE INSOLVENCY AND APPOINTED INTERIM RESO LUTION PROFESSIONAL W.E.F. 08.03.2019 AND THEREAFTER, RESO LUTION PROFESSIONAL ON 22.05.2019. THE ASSESSEE CATEGORICA LLY HAS STATED THAT SECTION 14 OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CO DE 2016 HAS DECLARED A MORATORIUM W.E.F. 08.03.2019. THE ASSESS EE FURTHER REFERRED TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 60(5) OF IBC, 2016 AND STATED THAT ONLY THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL HAS JU RISDICTION TO ENTERTAIN OR DISPOSED OFF ANY LITIGATION. THE ASSES SEE FURTHER REFERRED THAT SECTION 238 OF THE IBC PROVIDED THE S UPREMACY OF THAT LAW. IT WAS THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ABOV E MATTER MAY BE KEPT IN ABEYANCE TILL COMPLETION OF CORPORATE R ESOLUTION PROCESS. 2. THE LD DR. SUBMITTED THAT HE IS SEEKING ADJOURNMENT . 3. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND ALSO PERUSED THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. HON`BLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF ALCHEMIST ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION VS. M/S. HOTEL GAUDAVAN PVT. LTD. IN 145 SCL 428 (SC) WHEREIN, IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED THAT EVEN AR BITRATION PROCESS STARTED AFTER IMPOSITION OF THE MORATORIUM IS NOT VALID. EVEN THE PRESENT APPEALS ARE ALSO FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE COMPANY AND NOT THE IRP AS APPOINTED BY THE COMMITT EE OF CREDITORS. IF THE COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS DECIDES T O FILE THE APPEAL, THEN SUCH APPEAL IS REQUIRED TO BE FILED AN D SUBSTITUTED DCIT- CC-25, NEW DELHI V. PUNJ LLYOD LTD. / I.T.A.N O.2109/DEL/2017/A.Y.:2011-12PAGE 3 OF 3 DULY SIGNED BY THE IRP. FURTHER, ANY ORDER PASSED B Y US ALSO CANNOT HAVE ANY EFFECT TILL MORATORIUM PERIOD IN VI EW OF RESOLUTION 14 OF IBC, 2016. IN VIEW OF THE SPECIFIC REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE, PROVISIONS OF IBC, 2016 AND DECISION OF HON`BLE SUPREME COURT, WE DISMISS ALL THESE APPEALS WITH A LIBERTY TO FILE THEM FRESH, ON COMPLETION OF RESOLUTION PROCE SS, IF DEEM FIT. ACCORDINGLY, ALL THESE APPEALS ARE DISPOSED OF F AS DISMISSED. 5. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25/09/2019. 6. IN THE LIGHT OF ABOVE DECISION OF TRIBUNAL IN THE C ASE OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING SAME AND IN VIEW OF THE SPECIFIC REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE, PROVISIONS OF IBC, 2016 AND DECISI ON OF HON`BLE SUPREME COURT, WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF REVENUE WITH A LIB ERTY TO FILE THIS AS FRESH, ON COMPLETION OF RESOLUTION PROCESS, IF DEE M FIT. ACCORDINGLY, THIS APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISPOSED-OFF AS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. 8. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.11.201 9. SD/- SD/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (O.P.MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER AC COUNTANT MEMBER DATED: NOVEMBER, 2019/OPM COPY OF ORDER SENT TO- ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A) / ITAT (DR)/GUARD FILE OF ITAT. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT: DELHI BENCHES-DELHI