Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
CESTAT ALLAHABAD dismissed an appeal due to abatement for adjourning the matter beyond three times, citing Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. Referring to ISHWARLAL MALI RATHOD case, the Tribunal emphasized the Supreme Court's disapproval of mechanical adjournments, highlighting the need to avoid excessive delays in proceedings. The decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory limits on adjournments to prevent non-prosecution of appeals.
CESTAT ALLAHABAD dismissed an appeal due to abatement for adjourning the matter beyond three times, citing Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. Referring to ISHWARLAL MALI RATHOD case, the Tribunal emphasized the Supreme Court's disapproval of mechanical adjournments, highlighting the need to avoid excessive delays in proceedings. The decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory limits on adjournments to prevent non-prosecution of appeals.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.