Amalgamation and substitution lapse led to abatement of appeals, with liberty to seek restoration under law.

After the appellant company amalgamated with another entity, the Tribunal found that no timely and proper impleading or substitution application with supporting documents had been filed, despite awareness of the proceedings by the transferee company. Because the appeal could not validly continue in the name of the amalgamated company after such delay, the Tribunal held that the appeals had abated and rejected them. Liberty was left to seek restoration in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeals stood abated on account of amalgamation of the appellant company and failure to file a proper impleading application within time.

Analysis: The appellant's representative informed the Tribunal that the company had amalgamated with another entity in October 1998 and sought adjournment on the ground that the matter was being handled by the head office. The Tribunal noted that the transferee company was aware of the proceedings, yet no proper application for impleading with supporting documents had been filed for a long period. In the circumstances, and in view of the delay in taking steps after amalgamation, the Tribunal held that the appeal could not be proceeded with in the appellant's name.

Conclusion: The appeals were held to have abated and were rejected.

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal terminated the batch of appeals for want of a timely and proper substitution application after amalgamation, while leaving liberty to seek restoration in accordance with law.

---