https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404638 Repeated adjournment requests in a virtual e-hearing were treated as inconsistent with an application for early hearing, particularly where the Tribunal's procedure generally restricts adjournments and requires advance requests. The appellant produced no documentary proof of financial hardship, and the reference to section 35F did not establish the urgency claimed. The Tribunal applied the principle that persistent or casual adjournments amounting to non-prosecution may justify refusal of special relief, and dismissed the early hearing application. The appeal will be listed in the normal course. en-us Fri, 29 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Feb 2021 11:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404638 Repeated adjournment requests in a virtual e-hearing were treated as inconsistent with an application for early hearing, particularly where the Tribunal's procedure generally restricts adjournments and requires advance requests. The appellant produced no documentary proof of financial hardship, and the reference to section 35F did not establish the urgency claimed. The Tribunal applied the principle that persistent or casual adjournments amounting to non-prosecution may justify refusal of special relief, and dismissed the early hearing application. The appeal will be listed in the normal course. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 29 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404638