_Important judgment on NCLT_ *Is Tax demand raised against a Joint Venture (JV) unenforceable during the CIRP?* *Are the proceedings initiated by GST Dept. against the JV non-executable during the subsistence of the moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC?* _Shri Rajeev Bhardwaj (Judicial Member) and Shri Sanjay Puri (Technical Member)_ Case Citation: (2025) ibclaw.in 167 NCLT In this important judgment, Hon’ble NCLT Hyderabad Bench held that: (i) Any pre-CIRP tax liabilities qualify as ‘operational debt’ under the IBC and the GST Authorities cannot execute any recovery actions, if the tax demand relates to the Corporate Debtor. (ii) JV does not fall within the definition of the Corporate Debtor or Corporate Person because the JV is an unincorporated body. (iii) The Corporate Debtor’s share in the JV’s property forms part of its insolvency estate, subject to applicable legal and contractual considerations. Therefore, imposition of any tax liability on the assets of the Corporate Debtor will affect its liquidity. (iv) A JV may register separately under GST for compliance and operational ease, but this should not breach the provisions of the IBC. (v) The mere fact that the JV has a separate GST registration does not make it an Association of Persons (AOP). (vi) The demand raised by the GST Dept. for pre-CIRP cannot be enforced against the assets of the Corporate Debtor in the JV, as such enforcement would have an indirect impact on the Corporate Debtor, thereby violating the moratorium imposed under Section 14 of the IBC. Read here: https://ibclaw.in/mr-sai-ramesh-kanuparthi-vs-assistant-commissioner-of-commercial-taxes-and-anr-nclt-hyderabad-bench/