Customs Broker association membership becomes mandatory in the operating jurisdiction, with exclusive membership and limited compliance-time relaxatio...
The case involves an appeal before CESTAT regarding continuation post Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under IBC, 2016. NCLT approved a Resolution Plan during the appeal. CESTAT Mumbai, citing Rule 22 of CESTAT Rules, held that appeal abates upon IRP appointment and Resolution Plan approval. It emphasized that Tribunal's powers are limited by statute and rules. The decision aligns with legal precedent that Tribunal must act within statutory bounds. Therefore, the appeal abates as per Rule 22, in accordance with prescribed relief.
The case involves an appeal before CESTAT regarding continuation post Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under IBC, 2016. NCLT approved a Resolution Plan during the appeal. CESTAT Mumbai, citing Rule 22 of CESTAT Rules, held that appeal abates upon IRP appointment and Resolution Plan approval. It emphasized that Tribunal's powers are limited by statute and rules. The decision aligns with legal precedent that Tribunal must act within statutory bounds. Therefore, the appeal abates as per Rule 22, in accordance with prescribed relief.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
