# In the matter of Ruchi Soya Industries Limited

> NCLT judgment dated 2024-02-13. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLT-02625. Patanjali Foods Limited, formerly known as Ruchi Soya Industries Limited, filed an application…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 13 Feb 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLT-02625
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/ruchi-soya-industries-limited-a8953273

## Summary

### Background

Patanjali Foods Limited, formerly known as Ruchi Soya Industries Limited, filed an application (IA No. 1018/2023) in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of Ruchi Soya Industries Limited, seeking to quash or set aside an order dated 21.11.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs, Kandla, which raised a demand against the applicant related to a period prior to the approval of the resolution plan. The applicant had deposited Rs.95,21,009/- under protest towards the drawback amount and interest. The respondents conducted investigations in 2009-2010 alleging that the applicant had availed duty drawback on exported Soyabean De-Oiled Cake (DOC) manufactured using hexane procured without payment of central excise duty. A show cause notice was issued

…

## Facts

Patanjali Foods Limited (formerly Ruchi Soya Industries Limited) filed an application against the Additional Commissioner of Customs, Kandla, and Anr. The case concerns a demand raised by the Additional Commissioner of Customs against Patanjali Foods related to a period before the approval of its resolution plan under the CIRP. The applicant is engaged in exporting agriculture products, including Soyabean De-Oiled Cake (DOC), and had exported DOC from Kandla Port, claiming drawback benefits. In 2009-2010, the respondents investigated the applicant, alleging that the DOC was manufactured using hexane procured without paying central excise duty, thus making the drawback claim inadmissible. The applicant deposited Rs.95,21,009/- under protest. A show cause notice was

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the demand raised by the Respondent No. 1 vide Order dated 21.11.2022 bearing Reference No. …

**Ratio:** Once a resolution plan is duly approved by the Adjudicating Authority under sub section

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons (P)

…

**Interpretation:** The legal issue revolves around the interpretation of Section 31 of the

…

**Application:** In this case, the demand raised by the Additional Commissioner of Customs

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** V.G. B…; Prabhat…
- **Appellants:** Patanjali Foods…
- **Respondents:** Ruchi Soya…; Additional…
- **Advocates:** J. P.…; Subir K…; +1 more

## Timeline

- **2009-01-01 — Investigation by…**: Respondents conducted investigation and issued summons to the Applicant regarding duty…
- **2010-08-06 — Applicant Deposits…**: Applicant deposited two demand drafts…

## 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/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/ruchi-soya-industries-limited-a8953273