Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 governs abatement of appeals in case of liquidation proceedings. The appellant company faced recovery of irregular CENVAT credit availed, along with interest and penalty. NCLT Chennai ordered liquidation of the appellant vide order dated 19.03.2018. The Deputy Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Trichy registered its claim with the Liquidator. As the Official Liquidator did not apply for continuance of the appeal u/r 22, the appeal abated. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as infructuous due to the liquidation proceedings and non-application by the Liquidator for continuance.
Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 governs abatement of appeals in case of liquidation proceedings. The appellant company faced recovery of irregular CENVAT credit availed, along with interest and penalty. NCLT Chennai ordered liquidation of the appellant vide order dated 19.03.2018. The Deputy Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Trichy registered its claim with the Liquidator. As the Official Liquidator did not apply for continuance of the appeal u/r 22, the appeal abated. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as infructuous due to the liquidation proceedings and non-application by the Liquidator for continuance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.