Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle-13(1 v. Jvg Foods Ltd Through Official

$~53 & 54 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+CO.A(SB) 33/2016 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-13(1) ..... Appellant Through:Ms. Laxmi Gurang, Advocate versus JVG FOODS LTD THROUGH OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR ..... Respondent Through:Ms. Swati Setia and Mr. Gautam Kumar,Advocates for RBI.Mr. Rajiv Bahl, Advocate for OL. +CO.A(SB) 34/2016 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-13(1)..... Appellant Through:Ms. Laxmi Gurang, Advocate versus JVG FARM FRESH LTD ..... Respondent Through:Ms. Swati Setia and Mr. Gautam Kumar,Advocates for RBI.Mr. Rajiv Bahl, Advocate for OL. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL O R D E R %20.12.2016 CO. APPL. 5105/2016 in CO.A(SB) 33/2016 CO. APPL. 5108/2016 in CO.A(SB) 34/2016 Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions. The applications are disposed of accordingly. CO. APPL. 5104/2016 in CO.A(SB) 33/2016 The present application under Rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules,1959 read with Section 151 CPC for condonation of 17 days’ delay in re-filingthe appeal. Notice.Notice is accepted on behalf of learned counsel appearing onbehalf of the non-applicants, who fairly do not oppose this application. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. The delayof 17 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of. CO. APPL. 5107/2016 in CO.A(SB) 34/2016 The present application under Rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules,1959 read with Section 151 CPC for condonation of 19 days’ delay in re-filingthe appeal. Notice.Notice is accepted on behalf of learned counsel appearing onbehalf of the non-applicants, who fairly do not oppose this application. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. The delayof 19 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of. CO.A(SB) 33/2016 & CO.A(SB) 34/2016 The present appeals assail the order dated 08.09.2016, passed by theOfficial Liquidator, rejecting the claim of the Income Tax Department.Notice. Mr. Rajiv Bahl, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the OfficialLiquidator. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant as well as counsel appearingon behalf of the Official Liquidator, in unison, state that the order assailed in thepresent appeals would require re-consideration and in this regard, it would beappropriate to remit the matters back to the Official Liquidator for de novoconsideration of the claim instituted on behalf of the Income Tax Department. Having heard counsel appearing on behalf of the parties, I am of the viewthat in the present appeals, it would be just, necessary and appropriate to setaside the impugned order dated 08.09.2016 and remit the matter back to theOfficial Liquidator for fresh consideration of the claim on behalf of the appellants, in accordance with law. Directed accordingly. With the above directions, the appeals are disposed of. In the first instance, list the claim filed on behalf of the Income TaxDepartment before the Official Liquidator for de novo consideration on13.01.2017. DECEMBER 20, 2016 Aj SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.