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

..... ed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal 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 wa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rned counsel for the assessee is concerned, we find 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 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Tribunal took note of the conduct of the assessee's 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 c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X