<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (7) TMI 1037 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165602</link>
    <description>Where a party, despite notice, fails to appear before the appellate forum and offers no justifiable explanation, dismissal of the appeal for default will not be interfered with. The Tribunal had restored the second appeals after an earlier recall, but on the next date neither the assessee nor counsel appeared and no adjournment application was filed. The record disclosed no acceptable explanation for the absence, and one appeal also concerned rejection under section 30 of the Trade Tax Act for non-deposit of the requisite amount, which the Tribunal had found lawful. The challenge to the dismissal order therefore failed and the dismissal for non-appearance was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Aug 2014 15:06:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=361166" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 1037 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165602</link>
      <description>Where a party, despite notice, fails to appear before the appellate forum and offers no justifiable explanation, dismissal of the appeal for default will not be interfered with. The Tribunal had restored the second appeals after an earlier recall, but on the next date neither the assessee nor counsel appeared and no adjournment application was filed. The record disclosed no acceptable explanation for the absence, and one appeal also concerned rejection under section 30 of the Trade Tax Act for non-deposit of the requisite amount, which the Tribunal had found lawful. The challenge to the dismissal order therefore failed and the dismissal for non-appearance was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165602</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>