Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Transit Geo System Integrators Private ... vs Stahl Tecniks Private Limited

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal3 February 2022Ashok Bhushan

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is not a recovery mechanism, and an application under it is not maintainable to recover a claim that arises from a sales tax assessment liability fastened on the applicant, being in substance a claim for recovery of the difference between concessional and full sales tax payable under such assessment.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHIComp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 106 of 2022In the matter of:

Transit Geo System Integrators Pvt. Ltd. ....Appellant Vs. Stahl Tecniks Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent For Appellant: Mr. Dhiren R. Dave, Advocate. For Respondent:

ORDER

(Through Virtual Mode)

03.02.2022: Heard Shri Dhiren R. Dave, Learned Counsel for the

Appellant.

2. This Appeal has been filed against the order passed by the

Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi Bench,

Court-II dated 20.10.2021 by which Application filed by the Appellant under

Section 9 of the Code has been rejected. The Application was filed by the

Appellant under Section 9 claiming recovery of the amount from Corporate

Debtor due to reason that Form C was not supplied to the Appellant and due

to which tax liability was fastened on the Appellant by the Sales Tax

assessment order dated 28.03.2017. It is submitted that the amount which

was claimed falls within the definition of Section 5(21) of the Code and it was

operational debt. The Adjudicating Authority has rejected the Application. 2

3. In the Sales Tax assessment order, liability was fastened against the

Appellant by assessment order dated 28.03.2017 under which he has to

make the payment to Sales Tax due. The Application under Section 9 by the

Appellant was nothing but claim of recovery of difference between

concessional payment and payment of Sales Tax which has made under the

assessment order.

4. We are of the view that Section 9 proceedings are not envisaged for

such kind of claims. It is well settled and time and again repeated by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India-

(2019) 4 SCC 17" and other cases that IBC is not a recovery proceeding. In

event, if the Appellant has any claim against the Corporate Debtor regarding

sales tax dues, it is open for them to take such proceeding as may be

permissible but present was not a case where Section 9 proceedings ought to

have been initiated.

5. We do not find any error in the impugned order of the Adjudicating

Authority rejecting the Application. The Appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical)

[Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical) Anjali/nn

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 106 of 2022

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free