AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
[Per: Bench]
Through this application, the Applicant is seeking stay on the operation of order dated 18.06.2018 passed by Respondent No. 2 and recovery notice issued on 12.09.2018.
The facts, in brief, are that the Corporate Debtor was admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (in short "CIRP") vide order of this Adjudicating Authority dated 17.08.2017. The moratorium under Section 14 of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short "IBC, 2016) came into operation. The proceedings under GST laws continued in spite of fact of admission of the Corporate Debtor into CIRP being brought to the notice of GST Authority. This Authority vide order dated 11.05.2018 passed the order of liquidation in the case of Corporate Debtor. Liquidator was appointed. The GST Authority passed the order of assessment on 18.06.2018 and issued recovery notice on 12.09.2018.
Learned Counsel appeared on behalf of applicant and vehemently argued that proceedings under GST laws were taken in contravention of the provisions of IBC, 2016, hence, this order as well as notice of demand was liable to be quashed.
We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel and material on record. It is not in dispute that impugned order has been passed subsequent to the order of liquidation being passed by this Adjudicating Authority in the case of Corporate Debtor. The legal position is that on passing of the order of liquidation, the moratorium placed under Section 14 of IBC, 2016 comes to an end. Further, as per provision of Section 33(5) of IBC, 2016, the legal proceedings can be continued against the Corporate Debtor during the course of liquidation. In view of this legal position, as applicable to the facts of this case, we do not find any merit in this application. The same is, therefore, dismissed.
The application filed by applicant stands dismissed and disposed of.