Assistant Commissioner vs Shri Brijendra Kumar Mishra

In the matter of: Assistant Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise ...Appellant

Vs.

Shri Brijendra Kumar Mishra ...Respondent Resolution Professional for AGS Transact Technologies Ltd.

(Arising out of Order dated 10.03.2026 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench) in I.A. No.536 of 2026 in CP (IB) No.505(MB)/2025)

For Appellant: Ms. Radhika Bishwajit Dubey, Mr. Karan Khetani, Mr. Vivek Sharma, Mr. Saksham Sharma, Mr. Mathy Kutty, Advocates For Respondent: Mr. Yahya Batatawala, Advocate

JUDGEMENT

Per Justice N. Seshasayee, Member (Judicial)

The appellant herein has lost twice vis-à-vis his sales tax claims and the matter

is now pending adjudication before the Bombay High Court. It is in these

circumstances when the appellant preferred a claim before the Resolution 2

Professional, the latter has rejected it. And the appellant moved the Adjudicating

Authority in I.A. No.536 of 2026, and submitted that it was taking steps before

an appropriate Forum and if unsuccessful may re-approach the resolution

professional. In view of the same, the Adjudicating Authority has dismissed it.

Now this is under challenge.

2. We do not consider the appellant to be a person aggrieved inasmuch as

the Order has been obtained at its instance.

3. Having stated thus, we also note that the issue pertaining to appellant's

claim is still sub judice before the Bombay High Court. Even as we close this

appeal, we only require the resolution professional to ascertain if any provision

is made for contingent claims in the resolution plan. It is underscored that this

observation will not halt the approval of the plan, but inasmuch as it was brought

to our notice, we, in all fairness hold that it be brought to the notice of the COC.

The appeal is dismissed.

[Justice N. Seshasayee] Member (Judicial)

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) rs/manu