1 2026:CGHC:26838 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 78 of 2026 1 - Sarda Energy And Minerals Limited 73 A, Central Avenue Nagpur (Urban) Nagpur (Maharashtra) 440018. (Successor Company Of): SKS Power Generation Chhattisgarh Limited) 501-B Elegant Business Park Andheri Kurla Road Andheri (East) Mumbai (Maharashtra) -400059 ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Income Tax Officer (TDS) Aayakar Bhawan Vyapar Vihar Bilaspur Chhattisgarh - 495001 2 - Additional / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Officer (Tds) Central Revenue Building Civil Lines Raipur Chhattisgarh - 492001 3 - Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds) Aayakar Bhawan Hoshangabad Road Near Maida Mill, Arera Hills Bhopal Madhya Pradesh - 462011 4 - Bank Of Baroda Through Branch Manager I C F S Branch Corporate Financial Services Branch 3rd And 4th Floor 1012 Mumbai Samachar Marg Fort Mumbai (Mh) - 400004 ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner/s : Shri Soumitra Kesharwani, Advocate alongwith Shri Apurv Goyal, Advocate. For Respondents No.1 to 3 : Shri Ajay Kumrani, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Amit Chaudhari, Advocate. For Respondent No.4 : Shri Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate. NIRMALA RAO 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 01.07.2026 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs: “1] That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders quashing & setting aside the impugned notice dated 05/02/2026 (Annexure P/6) issued by Respondent No. 1, the Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bilaspur, under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, bearing DIN & Notice No. ITBA/COM/F/17/2025-26/1085620135(1) and all the consequential proceedings as being illegal, arbitrary, perverse and passed in violation of applicable law and judicial precedents; 2] That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders directing Respondent No. 1 not to further initiate or continue any proceedings for recovery of pre-CIRP income tax dues of M/s SKS Power Generation (Chhattisgarh) Limited against the Petitioner; 3] That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders, declaring that the initiation, conduct and culmination of proceedings by Respondents, are without jurisdiction, being contrary to the statutory framework, and ultra vires the provisions of the I&B Code, 2016 and the Income Tax Act, 1961 and consequently hold that all actions, notices and orders issued by Respondent No. 1 are void ab initio and unenforceable in law; 3 4] That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders directing the Respondent No. 1 to refund the amounts illegally recovered by arbitrarily attaching the Bank Accounts of M/s SKS Power Generation (Chhattisgarh) Limited (now operated by the Petitioner) towards pre-CIRP income tax dues along with interest at appropriate rate(s); 5] That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction directing Respondent No. 4 (Bank of Baroda) not to further act upon any future notice or proceedings initiated against the Petitioner in respect of pre-CIRP dues and to maintain the status quo in respect of Bank Accounts bearing A/c No. 29100200000359 and A/c No. 29100200000348; 6] That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.” 2) The petitioner Company was the successful resolution applicant of SKS Power Generation Chhattisgarh Limited. It acquired the Corporate Debtor pursuant to a Resolution Plan duly approved by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) vide order dated 13.8.2024. The said order was challenged by unsuccessful participants before the NCLT and their applications were rejected and the said orders were affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is further case of the petitioner that the Income-Tax Department failed to lodge its claim before the Resolution Professional and 4 after conclusion of the proceedings, issued a notice dated 5.2.2026. 3) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as no claim was lodged before the Resolution Professional, no subsequent demand can be made, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ghanshyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company and Ors., reported in (2021) 9 SCC 657. He would refer to paragraphs 99 to 102.1 thereof. The petitioner has challenged the subsequent notice and the order of attachment of the bank account issued under Section 226(3) of Income-Tax Act. 4) Learned counsel appearing for respondents No.1 to 3 would submit that the order passed by the NCLT and the decision taken by the Resolution Professional were not brought to the notice of the Department and therefore, alleged action was taken against the petitioner. He would contend that if the petitioner would place the relevant documents before the Competent Authority of the department, an appropriate decision would be taken. 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 6) As contended by counsel for respondents No.1 to 3, the order passed by NCLT and the decision taken by the Resolution Professional were not placed before the Competent Authority of the Department, therefore, this petition, at this juncture, is 5 disposed of, reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to submit the said documents before the Competent Authority of the Income-Tax Department within a period of 15 days from today. Upon such submission, an appropriate decision shall be taken by the said authority within a further period of 15 days. In the event the claim of the petitioner is decided in its favour, necessary steps with regard to refund of the tax amount shall be taken forthwith. 7) Accordingly, this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Nimmi