CIRP and approved resolution plan can abate a pending CESTAT appeal absent timely continuance by the successor-in-interest.

Where a company enters CIRP and a resolution plan is approved, a pending appeal before CESTAT abates under Rule 22 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 unless the successor-in-interest applies to continue it within the prescribed time. Once the resolution process substitutes the successor-in-interest and no continuance application is made, the Tribunal cannot proceed further. The approved resolution plan also places matters beyond further relief before the Tribunal, as the forum becomes functus officio in relation to issues merged in the plan.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeals survive after initiation of CIRP and approval of the resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and whether relief could be granted in the appeals thereafter.

Analysis: The appeals were pending when CIRP was initiated and the resolution plan was approved by the NCLT. Rule 22 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 provides that an appeal abates where a party is adjudicated insolvent or, in the case of a company, is wound up, unless continuance is sought by the successor-in-interest within the prescribed time. The reasoning adopted held that once the successor-interest is put in place through the resolution process, the rule becomes operative and, in the absence of any application for continuance, the Tribunal cannot proceed further. It was also held that the Tribunal becomes functus officio and cannot grant relief on matters that have merged in the approved resolution plan.

Conclusion: The appeals abated on approval of the resolution plan and no further relief could be granted in the appeals.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a company is taken into insolvency resolution and a resolution plan is approved, an appeal pending before CESTAT abates under Rule 22 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 unless the successor-in-interest seeks continuance within the prescribed period.

---