R.K. Agrawal, J. - (1.) The Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following question of law under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for opinion to this Court : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned Tribunal was justified in law in recalling its order dt. 31st Jan., 1984 after considering the assessee's request for adjournment on merits and also after rejecting the assessee's first miscellaneous application ? The reference relates to the asst. yrs. 1977-78 and 1978-79.
(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows : The appeals filed by the respondent-assessee in respect of the assessment years in question were dismissed by the Tribunal, Delhi vide order dt. 31st Jan., 1984. The Tribunal had proceeded to decide the appeals exparte after rejecting the application for adjournment. Thereafter miscellaneous applications were filed on 19th March, 1984, seeking recall of the two orders dismissing the appeals filed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, vide order dt. 27th March, 1984, had rejected the miscellaneous applications in the following words : 6. We have heard the learned senior Departmental Representative. The assessee is not represented despite the fact that on the last date of hearing, Sri R.C. Tandon, the learned counsel for the assessee has made a specific note under his signatures about the date of hearing. A telegram has, however; been received (without any confirmation) requesting adjournment in ITA Nos. 338 and 356/Del/1983 which request having been considered on merits, stood rejected. 7. In view of the above, since the request for adjournment was considered on merits and rejected and since no mistake apparent from record within the meaning of Section 254(2) of the Act has been pointed out and since the Tribunal has no power to review its earlier order and since we do not find any material much less reasons to exercise our inherent jurisdiction because no case has been made out for that. The present miscellaneous applications fail and stand rejected.
(3.) For reasons best known, the assessee preferred two applications afresh seeking recall of the order dt. 31st Jan., 1984. The Tribunal heard the learned Authorised Representative and this time had allowed the miscellaneous applications and recalled the order dt. 31st Jan., 1984 by the following words : 3. This time we have again heard the learned Authorised Representatives of the parties and we feel satisfied that the assessee could not be present and represented on the date of hearing of the regular appeals due to reasonable and sufficient cause, hence we exercise our inherent powers to do justice and accordingly recall our order dt. 31st Jan., 1984 and direct that the appeals will come up for hearing on 23rd of May, 1985, a date which shall be notified to the assessee through his counsel as also to the learned Departmental Representative at the earliest.;