https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415004 Repeated adjournments and refusal to argue after a clear warning justified dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution under Rule 20 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The Tribunal applied its discretion to either dismiss for default or decide on merits, relying on authority against mechanical adjournments and noting the need to curb adjournment culture and abuse of process. The revenue's request for early hearing lost any operative purpose after the dismissal and was therefore treated as infructuous. en-us Tue, 16 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Nov 2021 06:13:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415004 Repeated adjournments and refusal to argue after a clear warning justified dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution under Rule 20 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The Tribunal applied its discretion to either dismiss for default or decide on merits, relying on authority against mechanical adjournments and noting the need to curb adjournment culture and abuse of process. The revenue's request for early hearing lost any operative purpose after the dismissal and was therefore treated as infructuous. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 16 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415004