The appeal was filed against an order dated November 24, 2023, which approved the Resolution Plan of the Corporate Debtor. The appellant, Department of State Tax, had filed a claim and was treated as an Operational Creditor, being allowed only 1% of its claim. The appellant contended that it should have been treated as a Secured Creditor.
The Department of State Tax, through the Dy. Commissioner of State Tax, filed an appeal against an order dated November 24, 2023. This order approved the Resolution Plan for Siddheshwar Industries Pvt. Ltd. & Anr., which had been filed by the Resolution Professional. The appellant's claim was treated as that of an Operational Creditor, and only 1% of the claimed amount was allowed in the Resolution Plan. The appellant argued that it should have been classified as a Secured Creditor, and therefore, the Resolution Plan should have been rejected. The respondent, representing the Resolution Professional, countered this by citing a previous judgment of the Tribunal in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.246 of 2022, which involved the Department of State Tax, Through the
…Sign in to view the parties.
IA No.3461 of 2023 filed by the Resolution…
This Tribunal decided Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.)…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.
The appeal was filed against an order dated November 24, 2023, which approved the Resolution Plan of the Corporate Debtor. The appellant, Department of State Tax, had filed a claim and was treated as an Operational Creditor, being allowed only 1% of its claim. The appellant contended that it should have been treated as a Secured Creditor.
The Department of State Tax, through the Dy. Commissioner of State Tax, filed an appeal against an order dated November 24, 2023. This order approved the Resolution Plan for Siddheshwar Industries Pvt. Ltd. & Anr., which had been filed by the Resolution Professional. The appellant's claim was treated as that of an Operational Creditor, and only 1% of the claimed amount was allowed in the Resolution Plan. The appellant argued that it should have been classified as a Secured Creditor, and therefore, the Resolution Plan should have been rejected. The respondent, representing the Resolution Professional, countered this by citing a previous judgment of the Tribunal in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.246 of 2022, which involved the Department of State Tax, Through the
…IA No.3461 of 2023 filed by the Resolution…
This Tribunal decided Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.)…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.