https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92166 The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution under Rule 20 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The Tribunal found repeated, unjustified adjournments - exceeding the statutorily permissible number - and reliance on established Supreme Court authority condemning mechanical grant of multiple adjournments. The contemned conduct demonstrated misuse of the tribunal's indulgence and failure to prosecute the appeal despite repeated opportunities and express warnings. Consequently, in exercise of its procedural powers the CESTAT struck the appeal from its docket and entered dismissal, with any relief contingent upon appropriate application for restoration subject to payment of costs and compliance with applicable conditions. en-us Wed, 03 Sep 2025 08:19:26 +0530 Wed, 03 Sep 2025 08:19:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92166 The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution under Rule 20 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The Tribunal found repeated, unjustified adjournments - exceeding the statutorily permissible number - and reliance on established Supreme Court authority condemning mechanical grant of multiple adjournments. The contemned conduct demonstrated misuse of the tribunal's indulgence and failure to prosecute the appeal despite repeated opportunities and express warnings. Consequently, in exercise of its procedural powers the CESTAT struck the appeal from its docket and entered dismissal, with any relief contingent upon appropriate application for restoration subject to payment of costs and compliance with applicable conditions. Highlights Customs Wed, 03 Sep 2025 08:19:26 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92166