Failure to File Claim with Liquidator Renders Appeal Infructuous: CESTAT Reaffirms Finality of IBC Resolution Plan [Read Order]
CESTAT observed that the appeal would stand abated as the disputed service tax demand was not included in the claims filed with the liquidator during the IBC process
![Failure to File Claim with Liquidator Renders Appeal Infructuous: CESTAT Reaffirms Finality of IBC Resolution Plan [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/06/09/2041799-liquidator-renders-appeal-ibc-cestat-taxscan.webp "Failure to File Claim with Liquidator Renders Appeal Infructuous: CESTAT Reaffirms Finality of IBC Resolution Plan [Read Order]")
The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) recently observed that an appeal would stand abated, holding that the service tax appeal was infructuous due to the tax department’s failure to file its claim with the liquidator during the liquidation process as per the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). Also Read:Appeal before tribunal...
The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) recently observed that an appeal would stand abated, holding that the service tax appeal was infructuous due to the tax department’s failure to file its claim with the liquidator during the liquidation process as per the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC).
The appellant, M/s Veesons Energy Systems Pvt. Ltd., an entity engaged in the manufacture of boiler parts and agro-waste boilers for domestic and export markets was bought under liquidation process upon order passed by the NCLT.
Prior to the liquidation proceedings, the Goods and Services Tax (GST) & Central Excise Department, Trichy had filed claims for service tax under “Goods Transport Agency Services” on freight paid to their Carrying and Forwarding (C&F) agent for export goods.
However, among the several claims filed by the tax department during the liquidation process, the demand involved in the present appeal was not among them.
Understand the complete process and tax nuances of GST refunds, Click here
The tribunal consisting of Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical Member) and Ajayan T.V. (Judicial Member) noted that the liquidator had not received any claim from the tax Department for the demand raised in the present appeal and thereby the same was excluded from the admitted claims.
Further, stating Rule 22 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982, the tribunal observed that once a company is being wound up, the appeal or application shall abate, unless an application is made for continuance of such proceedings by or against the liquidator or other legal representative within sixty days of the liquidation order.
Consequently, by invoking Rule 22 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 the tribunal held that the since the Liquidator has confirmed non receipt of any claim from the Deputy Commissioner of GST and Central Excise and since no application was filed under Rule 22 for continuance of the appeal, the appeal shall stand abated.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
