9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 1043X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ake an application for continuation of the proceeding. In the appellant s own case, the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in R/Tax Appeal No. 32 of 2019 [ 2022 (8) TMI 1459 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] taking note of the judgments on the subject including that of Hon ble Supreme Court in Ghansyam Mishra s case [ 2021 (4) TMI 613 - SUPREME COURT] held that in such circumstances, the appeal abates. As observed by the Hon ble Supreme Court and High Courts in a catena of cases that the Tribunal is a creature of the statute; it cannot travel beyond the express powers vested under the Statute or Rules framed under the statute while deciding a statutory Appeal filed before it against the Orders of the prescribed statutory authorities mentioned under the statute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9.2019, the appellants have filed a miscellaneous application before this Tribunal on 29.05.2023. In the miscellaneous application, the appellants have narrated the facts of the proceedings before the Hon ble NCLT and enclosed orders passed from time to time. Further, referring to the judgment in the case of Ghansyam Mishra Vs. Edelweiss Reconstruction Company Ltd. - 2021 SCC Online SC 313 in relation to the appellant became infructuous, hence stands abated and any/all liability, if any, of any nature whatsoever, stands extinguished and prayed accordingly in the said application. 5. Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue submits that once the Resolution Plan is approved by the Hon ble NCLT, the appeals stand abated as per Rule 22 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings by or against the successor-in-interest, the executor, administrator, receiver, liquidator or other legal representative of the appellant or applicant or respondent, as the case may be : Provided that every such application shall be made within a period of sixty days of the occurrence of the event : Provided further that the Tribunal may, if it is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the application within the period so specified, allow it to be presented within such further period as it may deem fit. 9. The Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Alok Industries Ltd s case (supra) analysed in detail Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 and observed that aforesaid Rule 22 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in which condition the said doctrine shall apply in following manner. ----------------- 4.9 We are satisfied that the test laid down by the Hon ble High Court is applicable in the present case for us to hold so. It is quite interesting to note that applicant to the extent of demand made finds the order of NCLT binding and wants pronouncement in respect of the refund by this tribunal. Can we sit in judgement over the order of NCLT approving the resolution plan? Further issue of refund is any case not the issue raised in appeal it is for the applicant to approach the relevant authorities in the matter. -------------- 5.1 The appeals filed abate as per the Rule 22 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, with effect from the date of the approval ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
