2016 (11) TMI 637 - AT - Central Excise

Abatement of appeal - the Appellant Company has been wound up and the liquidator has been appointed by Hon ble Gujarat High Court in disposing the Company Petition No.44 of 2015 - even though the order was passed on 03.11.2015, there is no application for continuation of the appeal till date. Accordingly, the appeal is abated in view of the Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 - appeal abated.

Summary

Issues: Appeal against OIO, Company winding up, Abatement of appeal

Analysis:
- The appeal was filed against OIO No.26/Dem/2012, passed by the Commissioner, C.Ex. & S.Tax, Surat. The Appellant Company had been wound up, and a liquidator was appointed by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in disposing of the Company Petition No.44 of 2015. The learned Advocate for the Appellant submitted written arguments along with a copy of the High Court's Order dated 03.11.2015.

- The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, in its order, noted that the respondent had not responded to the statutory notice and failed to appear despite multiple opportunities. Consequently, the High Court appointed the Official Liquidator as the Liquidator of the respondent company under the Companies Act of 1956. Despite this order being issued on 03.11.2015, no application for continuation of the appeal was made. As per Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982, in the absence of such an application, the appeal was abated.

- The Tribunal found that since there was no application for continuation of the appeal following the High Court's order, the appeal stood abated. Therefore, the Tribunal pronounced the appeal as abated in accordance with Rule 22 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982.