Disposed

Necem Cements Limited and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Gauhati HC18 Aug 2022WA/307/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ appeal, the appellant challenged orders of the BIFR and subsequent notices regarding tax clearance and industrial reconstruction. The Court held that since BIFR is no longer in existence and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is in force, nothing survives in the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Nothing survives in the appeal; disposed of without order on merits.

Necem Cements Limited and Anr. Vs the State of… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010116512016

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WA/307/2016

¶5

NECEM CEMENTS LIMITED and ANR

¶6

A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI NAVNEET AGARWAL, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT HOUSING COLONY ROAD, RUKMINI NAGAR, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006

¶7

2: NAVNEET AGARWAL S/O- LT. S.P. AGARWAL R/O- HOUSING COLONY ROAD RUKMINI NAGAR DISPUR, GHY- 6

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM and 9 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006

¶10

2:THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPTT. OF INDUSTRIES and COMMERCE SECRETARIAT DISPUR, GHY- 6.

¶11

3:THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE and TAXATION DEPTT. SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GHY- 6.

¶12

4:THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXES ASSAM KAR BHAWAN DISPUR, GHY- 6.

¶13

5:THE CERTIFICATE OFFICER TAXATION KAR BHAWAN DISPUR, GHY- 6.

¶14

Page No.# 2/4

¶15

6:THE STATE BANK OF INDIA REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN CENTRAL OFFICE MADAM CAMA ROAD MUMBAI- 400021.

¶16

7:IFCI LIMITED REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR HEAD OFFICE- 61 NEHRU PLACE NEW DELHI- 110019.

¶17

8:THE ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD. FORMERLY CENTRAL ASSAM ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD. AND ALSO ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTAN BAZAR, GHY- 1.

¶18

9:APPELLAE AUTHORITY FOR INDUSTRIAL AND FINANCIAL RECONSTRUCTION JEEVAN PRAKASH BUILDING KASTURBA GANDHI MARG NEW DELHI 110001

¶19

10:BOARD OF INDUSTRIAL and FINANCIAL RECONSTRUCTION 21 FLOOR JAWAHAR VYAPAR BHAWAN 1 TOLSTOY MARG NEW DELHI 11000

¶20

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. P S TALUKDER Advocate for the Respondent :

¶21

BEFORE

¶22

HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Date : 18-08-2022 R.M. Chhaya, C.J.

¶25

Heard Mr. I. Chowdhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Atreya, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. S.P. Sharma, learned counsel

¶26

Page No.# 3/4

¶27

for the respondent No.8.

¶28

By way of this writ appeal, the appellant has challenged the order dated 18.05.2016 as well as the order dated 01.06.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 2955/2016 and Review Pet No.72/2016, respectively. The following prayers were made in the writ petition;

¶29

“(a) why impugned order dated 22.01.2016 (Annexure-55) passed by the Appellate Authority for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction in Appeal No.83/2014 as well as the impugned order dated 11.12.2013 (Anenxure-49) passed by the Board of Industrial & Financial Reconstruction in BIFR Case No.87/1997 should not be set aside and quashed; and

¶30

(b) why directions should not be issued to the Board of Industrial & Financial Reconstruction to restore the BIFR Case No.87/1997 to file and to consider the reference of the Petitioner No.1 Company in accordance with the provisions of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985; and

¶31

(c) why directions should not be issued to set aside and quash the notice dated 05.04.2016 (Annexure-56) and show cause notice dated 10.05.2016 (Annexure-58), both issued by the Certificate Officer (Taxation) Respondent No.5); and

¶32

(d) upon hearing the parties on the cause or causes, if any, being shown, be pleased to make the Rule absolute by passing orders as prayed in prayer (a) and (b) above by setting aside and quashing the impugned order dated 22.01.2016 (Annexure-55) passed by the

¶33

Appellate Authority for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction in Appeal No.83/2014 as well as the impugned order dated 11.12.2013 (Annexure-49) passed by the Board of Industrial & Financial Reconstruction in BIFR Case No.87/1997 and by restoring the proceeding of BIFR Case No.87/1997 to file

¶34

Page No.# 4/4

¶35

with direction to pass orders in accordance with the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 and notice dated 05.04.2016 (Annexure-56) and show cause notice dated 10.05.2016 (Annexure-58), both issued by the Certificate Officer (Taxation) (Respondent No.5);

¶36

(e) And/or Your Lordships would be pleased to pass such further or other order or orders as to Your Lordships may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, if required by moulding reliefs.

¶37

And

¶38

Pending disposal of the Rule, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to take any coercive action against the Petitioner No.1 Company and also stay the operation of the notice dated 05.04.2016 (Annexure-56) and show cause notice dated 10.05.2016 (Annexure-58), both issued by the Certificate Officer (Taxation) (Respondent No.5).”

¶39

In view of the fact that the Board of Industrial & Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) is no more in existence and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 has come into force, nothing survives in this appeal and the same is disposed of. It would be open for the appellant to take appropriate recourse tenable under the law.

¶40

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶41

Comparing Assistant

Necem Cements Limited and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Necem Cements Limited and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Joyram Das and Anr. Vs Sri Nabajyoti Nath and Anr.

Pankaj Kumar Deka Vs the Reserve Bank of India and Anr.

Taj Uddin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

M/S Basanti Seeds Centre Vs the Dgm, Bank of Baroda and Anr.

Necem Cements Limited and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 11 Ors.

Md. Giasuddin Ahmed and Anr, Vs the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and 2 Ors.