https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32762 Dismissal of an appeal for non-prosecution was unjustified where the assessee had complied with the pre-deposit and bank guarantee directions and effective service of the hearing notice was not proved. The record also showed that the address change had been intimated, so the Rule 20 dismissal could not stand. Delay in seeking restoration was excused because the assessee had a bona fide belief that the appeal was pending, supported by renewal demands for the bank guarantee, transfer between tribunals, the death of counsel, and lack of notice. The refusal to restore was set aside and the appeal was directed to be restored for hearing on merits with costs. en-us Fri, 02 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 29 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32762 Dismissal of an appeal for non-prosecution was unjustified where the assessee had complied with the pre-deposit and bank guarantee directions and effective service of the hearing notice was not proved. The record also showed that the address change had been intimated, so the Rule 20 dismissal could not stand. Delay in seeking restoration was excused because the assessee had a bona fide belief that the appeal was pending, supported by renewal demands for the bank guarantee, transfer between tribunals, the death of counsel, and lack of notice. The refusal to restore was set aside and the appeal was directed to be restored for hearing on merits with costs. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 02 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32762