Tata Steel Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2024) 460 ITR 595 (Delhi HC)]

S. 221 : Collection and recovery-Penalty-Tax in default-Dues payable to creditors for periods preceding the date of approval of the Resolution Plan can only be paid as per terms contained therein and therefore, demand recovery notices and consequent orders issued for preceding period are unsustainable in law and unenforceable. [143(3), 147, 148, 153A, 221(1), 271(1)(c), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016., S. 31, 238, Art. 226]

The assessee had acquired Bhushan Steel Ltd. in terms of the corporate insolvency resolution proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Subsequently, the assessee was in receipt of a notice under section 221(1) of the Act demanding payment of tax in respect of the acquired company. Upon filing of a writ by the assessee, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court  held that dues payable to creditors, including statutory creditors, for periods preceding date of approval of the resolution plan, can only be paid as per terms contained therein. Further, it was also held that where no provision is made for claims lodged on behalf of creditors or there is failure to lodge a claim with Resolution Professional, all such claims stand extinguished and the successful applicant whose plan has been approved should not be put in a position where it is called upon to liquidate dues which were not embedded in plan since, in law, the successful applicant is provided with a ‘clean slate’. Accordingly, dues for period prior to date when Resolution Plan was approved cannot be recovered and therefore, demand recovery notices and consequent orders issued for preceding period are unsustainable in law and unenforceable.(AY. 2001-02 2009-10, 2011-12, 2013-14)