Belated claims post CoC approval of resolution plan cannot be entertained; IBC timelines prevail over equitable considerations.

O R D E R

1. The present application has been filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax and Central Excise, under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, read with Rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016, with the following prayers: -

1. To direct the 1st respondent to forthwith include the claims submitted by the petitioner in Regulation 17 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016, in the list of stakeholders for adjudication.

2. To condone the delay in filing the present application in the interest of justice.

Brief facts of the case

2. The Applicant is a Central Government department entrusted with the administration of Customs, GST, Central Excise, Service Tax and Narcotics laws in India. The Respondent No.2 is an assessee under the Applicant and has outstanding statutory dues payable to the Government.

3. The Applicant stated that the Company Petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, was filed by M/s. Mudali Associates, Operational Creditor, and was admitted by this Tribunal vide order dated 04.04.2025, whereby the Respondent No.1 was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional. The present IA has been filed aggrieved by the order dated 01.10.2025 passed by the Interim Resolution Professional rejecting the claim of the Petitioner, who is the nodal national agency responsible for administration of Customs, GST, Central Excise, Service Tax and Narcotics in India, against the Respondent No.2, a public limited company engaged in the business of distilling, rectifying and blending of spirits and manufacture of ethyl alcohol.

4. It is stated that a Show Cause Notice dated 27.03.2024 was issued to the Respondent No.2 for short payment of GST for the period from November 2017 to September 2021, which was adjudicated and culminated in issuance of Order- in-Original No. 14/2024-25 GST dated 28.11.2024, confirming a demand of Rs. 2,11,21,920/- towards tax dues. Despite repeated demands, the Respondent No.2 failed to discharge the said statutory liability, and the default stood crystallised prior to initiation and admission of CIRP vide order dated 04.04.2025, entitling the Applicant to submit its claim, which has been erroneously rejected by the Interim Resolution Professional.

5. The Applicant stated that pursuant to the admission of the Company Petition, a public announcement was issued by the Respondent No.1 inviting claims from all stakeholders; however, the Applicant could not submit its claim within the time stipulated therein, as it is a government entity and the computation and verification of the statutory dues payable by the Respondent No.2 required considerable time, and further, the Applicant was initially unaware of the initiation of CIRP against the Respondent No.2. Thereafter, upon completion of the requisite internal verification and approvals, the Applicant submitted its proof of claim in Form C dated 30.09.2025 under Regulation 7 of the IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016, claiming an amount of Rs.6,06,55,182/- towards government dues for inclusion in the list of stakeholders, which was rejected by the Respondent No.1 solely on the ground that the Resolution Plan submitted by M/s Cupid Breweries and Distilleries Limited had already been approved by the Committee of Creditors on 08.09.2025.

6. It is further stated that the delay in filing the claim was b