The court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution in accordance with Rule 20 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The request for adjournment beyond the statutory maximum of three times was rejected. The counsel's justification of a fire incident in 2021 was deemed inadequate, as there was ample time to reconstruct the file or obtain relevant documents from the registry or the appellant. The court held that if the counsel was serious about the matter, they should have taken appropriate measures, and thus, the request for further adjournment could not be considered.
The court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution in accordance with Rule 20 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The request for adjournment beyond the statutory maximum of three times was rejected. The counsel's justification of a fire incident in 2021 was deemed inadequate, as there was ample time to reconstruct the file or obtain relevant documents from the registry or the appellant. The court held that if the counsel was serious about the matter, they should have taken appropriate measures, and thus, the request for further adjournment could not be considered.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
