Transit Geo System Integrators Private ... vs Stahl Tecniks Private Limited
- CitationComp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 106 of 2022
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
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