Introduction: In the case of Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) vs. Ferro Alloys Corporation Ltd., the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) appeals have been dismissed as a result of a significant order by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). This article delves into the details of the case and the subsequent legal proceedings.
Detailed Analysis: The NCLT approved a Resolution Plan, which faced opposition from the Revenue. The Revenue initially challenged the plan before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), but their appeal was dismissed. Following this, the Revenue filed an appeal with the Supreme Court, which, in turn, was also dismissed on January 30, 2023.
The core argument presented by the Revenue was that the claims prior to January 30, 2020, had been extinguished as per the Resolution Plan sanctioned by the NCLT. The Commissioner (Appeals) supported this stance and emphasized the necessity of implementing the order in alignment with NCLT’s directives.
In a significant development, the NCLAT’s dismissal of the Revenue’s appeal was upheld by the Supreme Court, thus concluding the matter. As of this point, the issue stands resolved and no longer warrants further legal action.
Conclusion: The case of Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) vs. Ferro Alloys Corporation Ltd. has reached its final resolution. The NCLT’s decision to uphold the Resolution Plan and the subsequent dismissals by the NCLAT and the Supreme Court have cemented the outcome. All pending appeals, including the one filed by the Revenue, have been dismissed as infructuous. This case serves as a notable example of the legal processes surrounding corporate insolvency resolution and their implications for claims and appeals.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT KOLKATA ORDER
The Early Hearing petition has been filed by the respondent. The Stay Application has been filed by the Revenue. After hearing both sides, we find that the issue is in a very small compass. With the consent of both sides after allowing the Early Hearing petition filed by the respondent and dismissing the Stay Petition filed by the Revenue which is routine in nature, the appeal itself has been taken up for disposal.
2. The Ld. Charter Accountant submits that the respondent has gone through the process of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) and all the claims prior to 30.01.2020 are already extinguished as per the Resolution Plan approved by the NCLT. He submits that even at the time of their appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), they submitted the details of the CIRP proceedings before the NCLT. The Commissioner (Appeals), has held as under.
3. “In view of NCLT initial order in the matter of C.P. (I.B.) No.251/KB/2017 dated 06.07.2017, NCLT final Order dated 30.01.2020 pronounced in the matter of CA (IB) No.157/CTB/2019 Connected with TP No. 42/CTW2019 arising out of CP (IB) No. 251/KB/2017, NCLT order in relation to rejection of Appeal filed by Office of the Assistant Commissioner, GST & Central Excise, Balasore Division, Bhubaneswar GST Commissionerate pronounced in the matter of CA (IB) No. 162/CTB/2019 and CA (IB) No. 176/CTB/2019 dated 30.01.2020, NCLAT Order dated 12.01.2020 pronounced in the matter NCLT Orders dated 30th January, 2020 passed by the NCLT, Cuttack Bench in I.A. No.157/CTB/2019 and I.A. No.176/CTB/2019 connected with TP No. 42/CTB/2019 arising out of CP(IB) No.251/KB/2017 and Board Circular 134/04/2020-GST dated the 23rd March, 2020, Hon’ble Supreme Court Order in the matter of Chanshyam Mishra & Sons Pvt. Ltd. vs. Edilwiess Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd., I found that the Order in Original No. AC/DMR/16/2019 dated 17.09.2019 can be decided and implemented only as per order of NCLT i.e. NATIONAL Company LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL and as per final outcome of Appeal pending before NCLAT i.e. NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APELLATE TRIBNAL. Accordingly the order disposed off.”
4. The Ld. Charter Accountant submits that against the NCLT’s order the Department had filed an Appeal before the NCLAT. Vide order dated 25.08.2022, the NCLAT has dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue.
5. Being aggrieved, the Revenue filed the appeal before Hon’ble Supreme Court, which has dismissed the Department’s appeal. Therefore, he submits that as on date the issue has reached finality. Accordingly, we prays that the present appeal filed by the Revenue may be dismissed as infructuous.
6. After going through the documentary evidence placed by the Ld. Charter Account, we find that the Resolution Plan approved by the NCLT was initially challenged by Revenue before NCLAT which has dismissed their appeal. Against the order passed by NCLAT, Revenue has filed an appeal before the Supreme Court, which was dismissed on 30.01.2023. Therefore, the present appeal filed by the Revenue does not survive. Accordingly we dismiss the same.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open court.)