Repeated Non-Appearance & Adjournment Culture: CESTAT Dismisses Appeal for Default Under Rule 20

HomeIndirect TaxesRepeated Non-Appearance & Adjournment Culture: CESTAT Dismisses Appeal for Default Under Rule...

Repeated Non-Appearance & Adjournment Culture: CESTAT Dismisses Appeal for Default Under Rule 20

Indirect Taxes

Published on

17/02/2026

By Mariya Paliwala

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench, has dismissed a service tax appeal filed by Weiss Rohlig India Pvt. Ltd. for non-prosecution after the appellant repeatedly failed to appear despite multiple opportunities. The bench of M. Ajit Kumar (Technical Member), Ajayan T.V. (Judicial Member) has invoked Rule 20 of the CESTAT…

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Mariya Paliwala https://www.jurishour.in/

Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Repeated Non-Appearance & Adjournment Culture: CESTAT Dismisses Appeal for Default Under Rule 20

Membership Required

Latest articles

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 12 AUGUST, 2026

Electrocution Compensation Claims Involving Disputed Facts Can’t Be Decided in Writ Jurisdiction: Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Separate Pay Treatment for Re-employed CGIT Presiding Officers, Rejects 6th Pay Commission Parity Claim

High Courts Can’t Grant Post-Dismissal Arrest Protection in GST Pre-Arrest Bail Matters; S. 69 Arrest Order Must Be Communicated: Supreme Court

More like this

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 12 AUGUST, 2026

Electrocution Compensation Claims Involving Disputed Facts Can’t Be Decided in Writ Jurisdiction: Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Separate Pay Treatment for Re-employed CGIT Presiding Officers, Rejects 6th Pay Commission Parity Claim

About us

Company

Categories