TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1932
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the respondent ORDER These appeals were heard on 3.3.2025 and the orders were reserved. Thereafter, the appellants filed these miscellaneous applications under Rule 41 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1985. This Rule reads as follows: Rule 41. Orders and directions in certain cases.- The Tribunal may make such orders or give such directions as may be necessary or expedient to give effect or in relation to its orders or to prevent abuse of its process or to secure the ends of justice. 2. The Miscellaneous applications were listed on 4.4.2025 but on the request made on behalf of the learned counsel for the applicant, they were adjourned to 15.4.2015. We have heard learned counsel for the applicant/ appellants and learned authorised repre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9. Thereafter, the matters were listed on 19.11.2024 but on the request of the learned counsel adjourned to 14.1.2025. On 14.1.2025, another adjournment was sought and they were listed on 3.3.2025. 10. Learned counsel for the appellants could not appear even on 3.3.2025 because he was away to Bangalore on 2.3.2025. Further, since the appeals were originally filed by another counsel, learned counsel could not get all the documents. 11. In view of the above, it is prayed that the order dated 3.3.2025 may be recalled and this appeal and the connected six appeals may be relisted for hearing. 12. Learned authorised representative for the Revenue vehemently opposed the miscellaneous applications and asserted that there is no reason to recall t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant but yet a communication has been sent by the appellant seeking adjournment. Shri Shreyansh Kushwaha, learned counsel, who has appeared for the appellant, has stated that on the next date the matter would be argued. List on March 03, 2025. 17. It must be pointed out that the above order was passed in open court in the presence of the learned counsel Shri Kushwaha. Thus, it was made explicit that there would no further adjournments first on 19.11.2024. However, since the appellant still prayed for another adjournment on 14.1.2025, and since the learned counsel for the appellant appearing on that day stated that the matter would be argued on 3.3.2025, it was adjourned. 18. On 3.3.2025, another adjournment was sought which was, not ag....