Income Disclosure Scheme immunity and search-material requirements barred further share-transaction additions in unabated assessments under section 15...
Toy balloon tariff classification: functional heading prevails over residual rubber and festive article headings, supporting penalties for deliberate ...
Customs valuation using comparable contemporaneous imports can displace declared value, while missing speaking orders require pursuit before competent...
The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution under Rule 20 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The Tribunal found repeated, unjustified adjournments - exceeding the statutorily permissible number - and reliance on established Supreme Court authority condemning mechanical grant of multiple adjournments. The contemned conduct demonstrated misuse of the tribunal's indulgence and failure to prosecute the appeal despite repeated opportunities and express warnings. Consequently, in exercise of its procedural powers the CESTAT struck the appeal from its docket and entered dismissal, with any relief contingent upon appropriate application for restoration subject to payment of costs and compliance with applicable conditions.
The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution under Rule 20 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The Tribunal found repeated, unjustified adjournments - exceeding the statutorily permissible number - and reliance on established Supreme Court authority condemning mechanical grant of multiple adjournments. The contemned conduct demonstrated misuse of the tribunal's indulgence and failure to prosecute the appeal despite repeated opportunities and express warnings. Consequently, in exercise of its procedural powers the CESTAT struck the appeal from its docket and entered dismissal, with any relief contingent upon appropriate application for restoration subject to payment of costs and compliance with applicable conditions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.