Inthehighcourtofdelhiatnewdelhi+W.p.(C) v. Deputy Commissioner Of Incometax Central Circle 19 & Anr

$~118 *INTHEHIGHCOURTOFDELHIATNEWDELHI+W.P.(C) 10774/2024 CM APPL. 44353/2024 CM APPL. 18664/2025SARE GURUGRAM PRIVATE LIMITED.....PetitionerThrough:Mr Ashish Mehta, Ms Aanchal Jainand Mr Bharat Jain, Advocates. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 19 & ANR. .....RespondentsThrough:Mr. Debesh Panda, SSC Ms. ZehraKhan, Mr. Vikramaditya Singh, JSCsMs Anauntta Shankar and Ms RavichaSharma, Advocates for the Revenue.Mr Piyush Beriwal, Mr Kautilya Birat,Mr Nikhil Kumar Chaubey and MsJyotsna Vyas, Advocates for UOI. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRUHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIAO R D E R30.04.2025 % 1.The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning theproceedings, as referred in Annexure P1 to the present petition. The saidAnnexure is set out below: - “Impugned Proceedings carried out by Respondent(s) against thePetitioner The following proceedings by Respondent 1 were initiated post theapproval of Resolution Plan vide Approval Order dated 24 April 2023which are pending / concluded as on date (all these proceedings relateto a period prior to 24 April 2023). demandnotice 2.The petitioner is essentially assailing the initiation of the proceedingsunder Sections 143(3), 270A, and 271ACC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [theAct] in respect of the Assessment Year 2022-23. 3.Concededly, the proceedings relate to the period prior to 24.04.2023being the date of the approval order in respect of a resolution plan preparedunder the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process .It is thepetitioner’s case that in view of the clean slate theory, the petitioner cannot bevexed by any proceedings or demand, which relates to the period prior to theorder approving the resolution plan, if the said dues or liabilities are notcontemplated under the said plan. 4.Undisputedly, the controversy involved in the present case is coveredin favour of the Assessee by the decision of the Supreme Court inGhanashyam Mishra & Sons Private Limited through the AuthorizedSignatory v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited through theDirector & Others: Neutral Citation: 2021 INSC 250. 5.In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and all proceedingsinitiated in respect of AY 2022-23 under Sections 143(3), 270A, and 271ACCof the Act are set aside. 6.The petition is disposed of in the abovesaid terms. The pendingapplications are also disposed of. VIBHU BAKHRU, J TEJAS KARIA, JAPRIL 30, 2025/MClick here to check corrigendum, if any