https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382816 Repeated adjournment requests, persistent non-appearance and non-compliance with an earlier direction justified dismissal for want of prosecution. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had already secured more than six adjournments, filed largely identical applications with only minor corrections, and relied on generic reasons such as personal difficulty and viral fever without cogent support. As further adjournment had been expressly declined, the continued absence was treated as a time-gaining strategy and a lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. Applying the principle endorsed by the Apex Court, the Tribunal exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. en-us Tue, 14 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Jul 2019 17:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382816 Repeated adjournment requests, persistent non-appearance and non-compliance with an earlier direction justified dismissal for want of prosecution. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had already secured more than six adjournments, filed largely identical applications with only minor corrections, and relied on generic reasons such as personal difficulty and viral fever without cogent support. As further adjournment had been expressly declined, the continued absence was treated as a time-gaining strategy and a lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. Applying the principle endorsed by the Apex Court, the Tribunal exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 14 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382816