Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
CESTAT dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution pursuant to Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The appellant had sought adjournments beyond the statutory maximum of three times permitted under Section 35C(1A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Relying on Ishwar lal Mali Rathod, where the SC condemned the practice of mechanical adjournments, the Tribunal found no justification for granting additional adjournments. The SC had previously emphasized that parties who repeatedly seek adjournments despite specific warnings and opportunities effectively misuse judicial grace, warranting dismissal of their proceedings.
CESTAT dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution pursuant to Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The appellant had sought adjournments beyond the statutory maximum of three times permitted under Section 35C(1A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Relying on Ishwar lal Mali Rathod, where the SC condemned the practice of mechanical adjournments, the Tribunal found no justification for granting additional adjournments. The SC had previously emphasized that parties who repeatedly seek adjournments despite specific warnings and opportunities effectively misuse judicial grace, warranting dismissal of their proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
