2002 (6) TMI 40

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nal dismissing the appeal preferred by the assessee. Mr. Janardhana Raja, learned counsel appearing for the assessee, forcefully submitted that the Tribunal was not justified in refusing the adjournment sought for on the date of hearing. He submitted that the assessee had sought for an adjournment on the ground that counsel for the assessee was away from Chennai and the request made on behalf of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the Appellate Tribunal has fixed the date of hearing of the appeal on December 12, 1994, when the assessee filed a petition for stay of the recovery of tax. Thereafter, the appeal was adjourned as many as ten times and it was found by the Appellate Tribunal that all the adjournments took place at the request of the assessee's counsel. It was adjourned on August 24, 2001, and on that date the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... counsel in seeking repeated adjournments and not being prepared to conduct the case and decided to proceed with the case on the merits of the case. We do not find any infirmity in that part of the order of the Tribunal in not granting adjournment to the assessee and proceed to decide the case on merits of the case. As far as the merits of the case are concerned, we find that the assessee has n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X