# In the matter of Commissioner of State Taxes & Excise & Ors. Vs. Naresh Kumar Sood, Liquidator Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 26 of 2021

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-10-18. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00149. The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of State Taxes & Excise, Deputy Commissioner of…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 18 Oct 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00149
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/commissioner-of-state-taxes-excise-ors-vs-naresh-kumar-sood-liquidator-company-a-06ccf2e2

## Summary

### Background

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of State Taxes & Excise, Deputy Commissioner of State Taxes & Excise, and Joint Director of Industries against an order dated 12.10.2020 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi) in IA/1459/2020 in (IB)/239(PB)/2017. The Adjudicating Authority directed the Respondent No. 1 and 2 (the Appellant Nos. 1 and 2) to issue a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to the Liquidator and Director of Industries in order to register the properties and allowed the application filed by the Liquidator under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

## Facts

The Commissioner of State Taxes & Excise, Deputy Commissioner of State Taxes & Excise, and Joint Director of Industries filed an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT). The Adjudicating Authority had directed the Appellants to issue a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to the Liquidator and Director of Industries to register properties of Biotropics Pharma Private Limited, the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against Biotropics Pharma Private Limited. Naresh Kumar Sood was appointed as the Liquidator. The Appellants claimed that Biotropics Pharma Private Limited owed them Rs. 1,22,70,000/- and Rs. 3,32,32,912/- under the HP VAT Act, 2005. They argued that Section 26 of the HP VAT Act

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority was correct in directing the Appellants to issue a No Objection …

**Ratio:** The NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority erred in directing the Appellants to issue

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT reasoned that the Adjudicating Authority failed to consider the aspects of the

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation is that the statutory first charge of the State Government

…

**Application:** The NCLAT applied this principle to the facts of the case and held that the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Anant Bijay…; Shreesha…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Commissioner of…
- **Respondents:** Biotropics Pharma…; Naresh Kumar…
- **Advocates:** Abhimanyu…; R.A. Thanpinao…; +3 more

## Timeline

- **2017-01-01 — Company Pe…**: Company Petition No.…
- **2018-04-16 — Letter fr…**: IRP sent a letter to Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax Department intimating the last…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 60(5) — Adjudicating Authority for corporate persons](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-60)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/commissioner-of-state-taxes-excise-ors-vs-naresh-kumar-sood-liquidator-company-a-06ccf2e2