Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal

Sri Jaiprakash Jaiswal vs Apl Metals Limited on 24 October, 2024

Author: Ashok Bhushan

Bench: Ashok Bhushan

         NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
                    Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 341 of 2024

IN THE MATTER OF:
Jaiprakash Jaiswal,                                           ...Appellants
(Proprietor Om Traders)
Versus
APL Metals Ltd.                                             ...Respondents

Present:
For Appellant       : Mr. Shaunak Mitra, Advocate.
For Respondents     : Mr. Rishav Banerjee, Ms. Patita Papan Biswal,
                      Advocates.

                                  ORDER

(Hybrid Mode) 24.10.2024: Heard counsel for the appellant as well as the counsel appearing for respondent.

2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 08.01.2024 by which Section 9 application filed by the appellant was rejected. Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order has relied on the assessment by Income-Tax authority where it was observed that bogus billing were resorted to, in paragraph-30 of the impugned order following has been observed:-

"30. The Income Tax Assessment order dated 30.12.2022 for the AY 2021-2022 categorically reveals evasion of GST, in Para 12 at Page 7 of the order. In Para 12.2 of the Assessment order dated 30.12.2022, mentions as under:
"12.2 From the above incident reports, it was ample clear that the entities against which incident reports have been generated by the DGGI, Kolkata were in bogus billing and since M/s APL Metals Limited was found reporting purchases from these entities, the same are also bogus"

Another Section 9 application filed by the different operational creditor against the same corporate debtor has already been rejected by this Tribunal vide order dated 05.09.2024 in CA(AT)(Ins) No. 568 of 2024. Ld. Counsel for the respondent submitted that in the order dated 05.09.2024 liberty was given to the appellant to take such remedy in law as available. The said remedy was obviously with regard to operational debt. We further make it clear that we had not made any observation with regard to the remedies which may be available to the parties under the Income-Tax Act. Following the judgment of this Tribunal dated 05.09.2024, we dismiss the appeal subject to observations as made above.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson [Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) harleen/NN Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 341 of 2024 2 of 2