AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ld. Counsel for the Respondent Ms. R.V.Yajura Devi, Advocate present through Video Conferencing Platform.
In relation to the Applicant pursuant to the query raised by this Tribunal during the last hearing to the Power of Attorney who represented the Applicant states that under Section 432 of the Companies Act, 2013 r/w Rule 45 of the NCLT Rules, he is entitled to make representation on behalf of the Applicant. However, upon a specific query posed by this Tribunal taking into consideration Section 432 on the principles of ejusdem generis in relation to the rule of interpretation which is required to be applied, whether he specifically falls in any of the qualifications as mentioned thereto or as near as possible like that of ICMA of UK or CPA of USA it is prescribed under Section 432 itself which reads as follows: -
"Section 432: Right to Legal Representation
A party to any proceeding or appeal before the Tribunal or the Appellate Tribunal, as the case may be, may either appear in person or authorise one or more chartered accountants or company secretaries or cost accountants or legal practitioners or any other person to present his case before the Tribunal or the Appellate Tribunal, as the case may be."
the Power of Attorney representing the Applicant is not in a position to answer the said query. Be that as it may, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent was heard as to whether the Applicant has been paid the amount which is payable under the resolution plan as agreed to by the Resolution Applicant as the grievance in the Application is that it has not been fully remitted.
Ld. Counsel for the Respondent represents out of the total sum payable of Rs. 82,69,372/- out of which a sum of Rs. 46,27,340/- has been deducted and paid to the revenue authorities by way of TDS which is required to be deducted under Section 195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. A perusal of the provision of Section 195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 shows that the TDS is required to be deducted only in relation to the income payments to be made to the NRI and not in relation to the principal repayment, if any.
In the circumstances, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent seeks for some time to clarify on this issue as to the nature of payment which was made, whether in relation to principal repayment in full or in relation to income and principal payment or in relation to exclusively interest. Taking into consideration the representation, this matter is adjourned to 08.07.2020 finally.
Let the RP be also present through Video Conferencing Mode on the said date along with the Counsel for the RP and also suitably clarify on this issue.