An appeal abates upon an appellant’s death unless continuation is sought under Rule 22.

The appellant, Shri Hanif K. Thara, proprietor of M/s. Unik Traders, challenged Order-in-Appeal No. 07/2018 dated 9 January 2018 before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai

During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant died on 21 June 2025, as evidenced by the death certificate produced by his counsel

The Department was represented at the hearing, but no application was filed by any successor-in-interest, executor, administrator, or legal representative seeking continuation of the appeal

Whether the appeal abates upon the death of the appellant when no application for continuation of the proceedings is filed within the prescribed period under Rule 22 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

Whether proceedings can be continued against or in relation to a deceased person in the absence of the necessary procedural steps for bringing the legal representative or successor-in-interest on record?

Rule 22 of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982 provides that an appeal abates on the death of an appellant or respondent unless an application is made for continuation of the proceedings by or against the successor-in-interest, executor, administrator, receiver, liquidator, or other legal representative; such application must ordinarily be filed within sixty days of the relevant event, subject to extension for sufficient cause

The Tribunal also relied on Shabina Abraham & Ors. v. Collector of Central Excise & Customs, 2015 (322) E.L.T. 372 (S.C.), which held that proceedings cannot be initiated or continued against a dead person in violation of natural justice, since the deceased cannot defend himself or herself

The Tribunal accepted the death certificate and found that the appellant had died during the pendency of the appeal on 21 June 2025

Since no application for continuation of the appeal had been filed by a successor-in-interest or legal representative, the mandatory condition under Rule 22 was not satisfied

Applying the principle in Shabina Abraham, the Tribunal held that proceedings could not continue against the deceased appellant, as doing so would offend the requirements of natural justice

The appeal therefore stood abated by operation of Rule 22

Customs Appeal No. 40374 of 2018 was accordingly disposed of as abated