2018 (10) TMI 1726 - AT - Service Tax

Appointment of Official Liquidator - It is the contention of the Advocate on record that since the Official Liquidator has been appointed in the matter their Vakalatnama stands discharged - steps taken in accordance with Rule 22 of CESAT (Procedure) Rules 1982 or not? - HELD THAT - ven though the liquidation proceedings commenced by order dated 4.12.2017 however no steps has been taken by the appellant in accordance with Rule 22 of CESAT (Procedure) Rules 1982. Therefore the appeals are abated. The Registry is directed to forward a copy of the order of this Tribunal to the Official Liquidator at the address given by the Advocate on record for the appellant.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Appeal against Order-in-Original dated 30.12.2015 - Abatement of appeal due to appointment of Official Liquidator - Compliance with Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Appeal against Order-in-Original dated 30.12.2015
The judgment pertains to an appeal filed against Order-in-Original No. 71/STC-I/SM/2015-16 dated 30.12.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai-I. The appellant did not appear during the hearing, and it was noted that the Official Liquidator had been appointed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in a related matter. The Advocate on record stated that their Vakalatnama stands discharged due to the appointment of the Official Liquidator.

Issue 2: Abatement of appeal due to appointment of Official Liquidator
The learned AR for the Revenue argued that although the liquidation proceedings had commenced as per the order dated 4.12.2017, the appellant had not taken any steps in accordance with Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982. The Tribunal found merit in the Revenue's contention and held that the appeals stand abated due to the lack of action by the appellant following the appointment of the Official Liquidator.

Issue 3: Compliance with Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982
The judgment emphasizes the importance of complying with Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 in cases where liquidation proceedings are initiated. The failure of the appellant to take necessary steps as per the rules led to the abatement of the appeals. The Tribunal directed the Registry to send a copy of the order to the Official Liquidator as per the address provided by the Advocate on record for the appellant, thereby formalizing the abatement of the appeal.

In conclusion, the judgment underscores the significance of adherence to procedural rules, especially in cases involving liquidation proceedings, and highlights the consequences of non-compliance, such as the abatement of appeals. The decision serves as a reminder of the legal obligations placed on parties in such situations and the need for timely and appropriate actions to be taken in accordance with the established rules and procedures.