Page 76 - GSTL_26th March 2020_Vol 34_Part 4

586 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 34
as to whether a pending proceeding before GST authority also a proceeding as
provided in Section 14(1)(a) of IBC not been examined by Commissioner -
Matter remanded back for examination above aspect. [paras 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
Matter remanded
REPRESENTED BY : Shri M. Kataki, Advocate, for the Petitioner.
[Judgment and Order (Oral)]. - Heard Mr. M Kataki, Learned Counsel
for the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Keyal, Learned ASGI appearing for the Union of
India.
2. The order, dated 15-11-2019 of the Commissioner, GST, Dibrugarh is
assailed in this writ petition. By the said order, a requirement for payment of Rs.
1,82,67,651/- on the petitioner M/s. National Plywood Industries Limited was
confirmed and further a penalty of Rs. 1,82,67,581/- was imposed under Rule
173Q(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The said order dated 15-11-2019 has
been assailed by stating that the petitioner has been held to be a corporate debtor
as per the order dated 26-8-2019 of the National Company Law Tribunal, Gu-
wahati and accordingly an order of moratorium had been passed under Section
13 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
3. Mr. S.C. Keyal, Learned ASGI refers to the paragraph 3.2 of the order
of the Commissioner dated 15-11-2019 which is extracted as under :
“3.2 I find that the Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal, Guwahati
Bench had passed the order dated 26-8-2019 in respect of the bankruptcy
case of the assessee wherein they are liable to certain debt to the financial
creditor and their properties are also controlled for the debt including any
action under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and En-
forcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. By virtue of the order dated 26-8-
2019, the Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal has declared a Morato-
rium under the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 in terms of Section 14
of the said code vide which proceedings against the corporate debtor in-
cluding execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, tri-
bunal, arbitration panel or other authority was prohibited. Now, the ques-
tion arises whether adjudication of Show cause notices would mean an exe-
cution order or be treated as decree against them. I find that adjudication
means determination of liability against any assessee to whom show cause
notices have been served and in the instant case also there is no bar of the
tax authority to carry out the exercise of adjudication process for determin-
ing the liability of the assessee towards the department.”
4. By relying on the view taken by the Commissioner, Mr. Keyal sub-
mits that the said objection raised by the petitioner as regards the order of mora-
torium passed by the National Company Law Tribunal had been taken care of by
the Commissioner in its order.
5. We have perused the order of the Commissioner in paragraph 3.2 of
the order, dated 15-11-2019. The Commissioner takes a view that by the order,
dated 26-8-2019, the National Company Law Tribunal has declared a moratori-
um under Section 14 (Section 13) of The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016
against the corporate debtor in respect of execution of any judgment and decree
or order of any court of law, Tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority. Ac-
cordingly, in the order of the Commissioner a question was raised whether issu-
ance of show cause notice by the GST authorities would mean to be an execution
of an order or it be treated as decree against the petitioner. By raising such ques-
tion, the objection that the further proceeding is not maintainable because of the
order of moratorium of the National Company Law Tribunal was overruled.
GST LAW TIMES  26th March 2020  172