The Department of State Tax filed an appeal challenging an order dated December 16, 2021, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Court-III). The Adjudicating Authority had approved a Resolution Plan submitted by the Resolution Professional. The appellant's claim was for Rs. 43,72,97,479, out of which the Resolution Professional accepted Rs. 36,68,12,729. However, the appellant was allotted only 1% of the admitted claim in the Resolution Plan.
The Department of State Tax filed an appeal against the approval of a Resolution Plan by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT, Mumbai). The appellant, Department of State Tax, had a claim of Rs. 43,72,97,479, but only Rs. 36,68,12,729 was admitted by the Resolution Professional. The Resolution Plan allotted only 1% of the admitted claim to the appellant. The appellant argued that its claim should have been treated as a secured charge, relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in "State Tax Officer Vs. Rainbow Papers Limited". The respondent contended that a review petition was filed against the Supreme Court's judgment and that the judgment was distinguishable. The court compared Section 48 of the Gujarat VAT Act with Section 37 of the Maharashtra VAT Act, noting a
…Sign in to view the parties.
The Adjudicating Authority (National Company…
The Hon'ble Supreme Court issued notice on…
The Department of State Tax filed an appeal challenging an order dated December 16, 2021, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Court-III). The Adjudicating Authority had approved a Resolution Plan submitted by the Resolution Professional. The appellant's claim was for Rs. 43,72,97,479, out of which the Resolution Professional accepted Rs. 36,68,12,729. However, the appellant was allotted only 1% of the admitted claim in the Resolution Plan.
The Department of State Tax filed an appeal against the approval of a Resolution Plan by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT, Mumbai). The appellant, Department of State Tax, had a claim of Rs. 43,72,97,479, but only Rs. 36,68,12,729 was admitted by the Resolution Professional. The Resolution Plan allotted only 1% of the admitted claim to the appellant. The appellant argued that its claim should have been treated as a secured charge, relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in "State Tax Officer Vs. Rainbow Papers Limited". The respondent contended that a review petition was filed against the Supreme Court's judgment and that the judgment was distinguishable. The court compared Section 48 of the Gujarat VAT Act with Section 37 of the Maharashtra VAT Act, noting a
…The Adjudicating Authority (National Company…
The Hon'ble Supreme Court issued notice on…