https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83563 Repeated prior adjournments and an unsupported request for absence of counsel justified refusal of a further adjournment. The Tribunal noted that the appeal concerned extension of time for issuance of a show cause notice and that the extended period had already expired, making further delay unwarranted. Applying Rule 20 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982, it dismissed the appeal for default of appearance after the appellants failed to show sufficient cause for non-appearance. en-us Sun, 26 Jun 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Jul 2011 12:02:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83563 Repeated prior adjournments and an unsupported request for absence of counsel justified refusal of a further adjournment. The Tribunal noted that the appeal concerned extension of time for issuance of a show cause notice and that the extended period had already expired, making further delay unwarranted. Applying Rule 20 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982, it dismissed the appeal for default of appearance after the appellants failed to show sufficient cause for non-appearance. Case-Laws Central Excise Sun, 26 Jun 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83563