The CESTAT dismissed an appeal for non-prosecution under Rule 20 ...

Appeal Dismissed After Multiple Adjournments Exceeding Statutory Limit of Three Under Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules

March 11, 2025

Case Laws Service Tax AT

The CESTAT dismissed an appeal for non-prosecution under Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, after multiple adjournments exceeded the statutory maximum of three. Citing Ishwar lal Mali Rathod [2021], where the Supreme Court condemned the practice of mechanical adjournments, the Tribunal noted that appellant had misused judicial grace by repeatedly seeking postponements. The Court emphasized that granting adjournments beyond the statutory limit lacks justification, particularly when parties fail to utilize previously granted opportunities for presenting their case. This ruling reinforces judicial efficiency principles and discourages dilatory tactics in tribunal proceedings.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The CESTAT dismissed an appeal for non-prosecution under Rule 20 ...

Appeal Dismissed After Multiple Adjournments Exceeding Statutory Limit of Three Under Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules

March 11, 2025

Case Laws Service Tax AT

You may also like:

Condonation of delay in filing the appeal and non-payment of fee towards filing of appeal - delay of 920 days - The case revolved around an appeal filed against a ruling...

The CESTAT, an Appellate Tribunal, dismissed an appeal due to abatement caused by non-prosecution of the case. The Tribunal held that adjourning a matter beyond three...

CESTAT ALLAHABAD dismissed an appeal due to abatement for adjourning the matter beyond three times, citing Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. Referring to...

The circular addresses the Reduction of Government Litigation by setting monetary limits for filing appeals before GSTAT, High Courts, and Supreme Court. It refers to...

The CESTAT Chandigarh addressed the maintainability of appeals below the monetary threshold limit set by CBIC circulars. The tribunal emphasized the binding nature of...

The circular enhances monetary limits for filing appeals by the Income Tax Department before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, High Courts, and Supreme Court. For appeals...

Condonation of delay in filing appeal before commissioner (appeals) - appeal dismissed for the reason that it was filed beyond the statutory time limit - section 85 of...

Maintainability of appeal - non-prosecution of the case - Request for adjournment, which cannot be accepted in virtual hearing - The case involved repeated requests for...

CIT(Appeals) dismissed assessee's appeal for non-prosecution despite assessee being afforded multiple opportunities to participate. However, CIT(Appeals) failed to...

The NCLAT dismissed the appeal, declining to condone the delay of 156 days in re-filing. The appellant's explanation was found insufficient to condone such a prolonged...

The Appellate Tribunal considered the maintainability of an appeal based on the monetary limit involved and the assessment made by the department. The Tribunal noted...

CESTAT dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution pursuant to Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. The appellant had sought adjournments beyond the statutory maximum...

Filing of appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) - time limit - Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) was justified in dismissing the appeal as barred by time. - HC

The case pertains to the scope of limited scrutiny by the assessing officer regarding computation of capital gains u/s 45 and providing exemption u/s 54B of the Income...

Monetary limit for filing appeals before High Court not breached for assessment years 2006-07 to 2010-11, appeals dismissed as not maintainable. For assessment years...

Quick Updates: