https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419824 The appeal was deemed infructuous and abated as the Resolution Plan approved by NCLT and NCLAT, binding on the Revenue, extinguished claims not included in the plan. The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal under Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, following the Supreme Court's ruling in Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons. The binding effect of Resolution Plans post-approval freezes specified claims, extinguishes others, and prevents action on excluded dues, clarifying the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code's provisions. en-us Wed, 09 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419824 The appeal was deemed infructuous and abated as the Resolution Plan approved by NCLT and NCLAT, binding on the Revenue, extinguished claims not included in the plan. The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal under Rule 22 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, following the Supreme Court's ruling in Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons. The binding effect of Resolution Plans post-approval freezes specified claims, extinguishes others, and prevents action on excluded dues, clarifying the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code's provisions. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 09 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419824