Case Law Details
Murli Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Mumbai)
It is not disputed that the Resolution Plan for the appellant company was approved by Learned NCLT vide its orders dated 3.7.2019 and 22.7.2019. As per Section 31(1) of I&B Code, once a resolution plan is duly approved by the Adjudicating Authority, the claims as provided in the resolution plan shall stand frozen and will be binding on the Corporate Debtor and its employees, members, creditors including the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority, guarantors and other stake holders. In the instant case the Resolution Plan was approved by the learned NCLT vide its order dated 3.7.2019 and certain clarifications in some paragraphs of the order were made by the learned NCLT vide its order dated 22.7.2019.
I have also seen the Final Order No. A/85969-85970/2022 dated 19.10.2022 in the matter of M/s. Alok Industries Ltd. vs. CCE, Belapur of this Tribunal in similar circumstances in which it has been held that the appeal abates in terms of Rule 22 ibid with effect from the date of approval of resolution plan by learned NCLT.
Learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance on the decision of a co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the matter of Final Order No. A/11268/2022 in Customs Appeal No. 45 of 2012; M/s. Ultratech Nathdwara Cement Ltd. vs. CC, Jamnagar (Prev) in which it has been held that although in such cases appeal has become infructuous but Rule 22 cannot be said to be applicable on such cases. But in my considered view the decision of this very Tribunal in appellant’s own case (supra) on similar facts has the binding effect since as per the records available, the same has not been challenged by the appellant before any higher forum and has attained finality. Following the same, I am of the view that the appeal filed by the appellant herein has become infructuous and abated in terms of Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982.
As the appeal has already been abated therefore in my considered view the appellant cannot claim any refund before this Tribunal of any pre-deposit made by them before the Commissioner (Appeals), as the power which Hon’ble Supreme Court/High Courts can exercise are not available with this Tribunal. For that the appellants are at liberty to seek redressal before the appropriate forum, in accordance with law.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
