- (1.) THE Tribunal, Allahabad has referred the following questions of law under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for opinion to this Court : "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the mistakes pointed out by the assessee had really crept in the order of the Tribunal and that such mistakes went to the root of the matter ? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was correct in law in ordering that the appeal be heard de novo ? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal had powers to recall and quash its own order novo on the merits ? in ITA Nos. 760, 761 and 762 (AM) of 1978 -79 had become final and that it was not entitled to revise its decision in a subsequent proceedings on the basis of an application filed by the assessee ? 5. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it can be said that the Tribunal had no powers to recall its 6. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal had inherent powers to review its earlier order, to recall the same and to order that the appeal be heard de novo -
(2.) THE reference relates to the asst. yrs. 1974 -75 and 1976 -77.
(3.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows : The Tribunal had dismissed the appeal filed by the Department. Thereafter, an application under s. 254(2) of the Act was filed by the respondent pointing out that some factual mistakes have crept in the order of the Tribunal. The contention of the respondent was that the mistakes go to the root of the matter and, therefore, the appeal is to be heard find that it was not disputed that the mistakes pointed out had crept in the order of the Tribunal. The only stand taken by the Department was that there is no necessity of hearing the appeal de novo to get the mistake corrected. The Tribunal, on finding that the mistakes crept in, had recalled its earlier order and directed the appeal to be heard de novo on the merits.;