RAMAN GUPTA,DELHI V. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 17, NEW DELHI

ITA 3570/DEL/2023

AI Insights

This case involves cross appeals by Raman Gupta, the assessee, and the revenue authorities against the order of the First Appellate Authority concerning the assessment year 2017-18. The appeals were rendered infructuous due to the initiation of insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against the assessee, leading to a moratorium. The tribunal referenced the Supreme Court's decision in PCIT vs. Monnet Ispat and Energy Ltd., which established the overriding effect of the IBC over other statutes, including the Income Tax Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 835689 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2023
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT vs. Monnet Ispat and Energy Ltd. SLP (C) No. 6483 of 2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AJAY KUMAR ARORA

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3570/DEL/2023 A.YR. : 2017-18 RAMAN GUPTA, 138-139, MAIN ROAD, GHAZIPUR, DELHI – 110 096 (PAN: ABAPG1217G) Vs. ACIT, JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, NCC DIT(S) New Delhi – 110 055 (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NO. 3758/DEL/2023 A.YR. : 2017-18 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, 244, 2ND FLOOR, E-2 ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, New Delhi – 110 055 Vs. RAMAN GUPTA, 138-139, MAIN ROAD, GHAZIPUR, DELHI – 110 096 (PAN: ABAPG1217G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of Hearing 29.1.2026 Date of Pronouncement 11.2.2026 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, AM : These are cross appeals filed by the Assessee as well as Revenue are directed against the order of the Ld. First Appellate Authority dated 13.10.2013 relevant to assessment year 2017-18. Assessee by None Department by Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR. Printed from counselvise.com 2 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee, despite issue of notice of hearing. However, on record, an email dated 28.1.2026 of the Assessee’s A.R, Shri Pradeep Sharma, S.R. Dinodia & Co. LLP, Chartered Accountant has been placed wherein, it has been mentioned that due to non-cooperation of the assessee, the Ld. AR of the assessee wishes to withdraw from this case and requested to allow them to withdraw the Power of Attorney earlier filed in this case. 3. It is noted that proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) has been initiated against the assessee and a moratorium has been imposed by an order dated 13.05.2025 in the matter of National Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. vs. Raman Gupta (assessee) in CP(IB)- 337(PB)2021 & IA 890/2025 issued by the Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, under the IBC, a copy of which has been placed on record. 4. Ld. DR did not controvert the aforesaid factual matrix. 5. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the records. We find that provisions contained under section 238 of “the Code” are having an overriding effect over all other Central and State statutes including Income Tax Act as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT vs. Monnet Ispat and Energy Ltd. SLP (C) No. 6483 of 2018 order dated 10.8.2018 by returning following findings:- “Given section 238 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, it is obvious that the Code will override anything inconsistent contained in any other enactment, including the Income Tax Act.” 6. In this view of the matter, section 238 of the Code will have overriding effect over all other Central and State statutes including the Income Tax Act and all the claims including claim of the Income Tax Department under the Income Tax Act, 1961 shall be entertained by the Official Liquidator u/s. 53(1) of the Printed from counselvise.com 3 Code. In the background of the aforesaid factual matrix, the Appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue have become infructuous and dismissed as such. However, the assessee and revenue both are at liberty to approach the Tribunal for reinstitution of their respective appeals and the Tribunal shall consider such applications appropriately, as per law. 7. In the result, for statistical purposes, both the appeals stands dismissed in the aforesaid manner. The above decision was pronounced on 11-2-2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RENU JAUHRI) (SUDHIR KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER “SRBHATNAGGAR” Date: 11-2-2026 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "