Non-prosecution: appeals dismissed where appellant failed to appear or seek adjournment after adjourned hearing notice served.

Appeals were dismissed for non-prosecution where the appellant failed to appear or seek adjournment after an adjourned hearing notice; the governing principle applied is that mere filing of an appeal does not satisfy the duty to actively prosecute. The Tribunal relied on precedent and its power under Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 to treat unprosecuted appeals as unadmitted or to dismiss them. The operative effect is that absence without seeking adjournment following service of notice permits dismissal of the appeals in favour of the revenue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeals filed by the assessee should be dismissed for non-prosecution where the assessee failed to appear or seek adjournment on the date fixed for hearing.

Analysis: The appeals were filed and later adjourned on an earlier date; notice for the adjourned hearing was served but the assessee did not appear and did not seek further adjournment. The Tribunal applied established principles that mere filing of an appeal does not substitute for active prosecution and that an appeal may be treated as unadmitted or dismissed where the appellant fails to prosecute the matter despite notice. The Tribunal relied on judicial precedents applying the same principle and on the Tribunal's powers to dismiss or treat an appeal as unadmitted in such circumstances, consistent with Rule 19 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.

Conclusion: The appeals are dismissed for non-prosecution; result is against the assessee and in favour of the revenue.

---