1983 (4) TMI 92 - AT - Wealth-tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in recalling back the order decided on merit for re-decision?
2. Validity of service of notice under section 41 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.
3. Application of natural justice principles in Tribunal's decision-making process.

Analysis:
1. The Commissioner filed reference applications under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, seeking the Tribunal to refer a common question of law to the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. The question pertained to the Tribunal's jurisdiction to recall an order decided on merit for re-decision, especially considering the principle that the Tribunal cannot review or reverse its earlier order once it has remanded the case. The Tribunal heard both parties and acknowledged the absence of proper opportunity for the assessee in the initial order dated 12-11-1981. Consequently, the Tribunal recalled its order to ensure justice and grant the assessee a fair hearing, emphasizing the duty to do justice in accordance with the law.

2. The Tribunal noted that the regular appeals were decided ex parte due to the absence of valid service of notice on the assessee as required under section 41 of the Act. Recognizing the inherent lack of jurisdiction in deciding the appeals ex parte, the Tribunal exercised its inherent powers to rectify the mistake and uphold principles of natural justice. The decision to recall the order was not a review of the order but a corrective measure to address the lack of proper notice and ensure fairness in the proceedings.

3. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of natural justice, which necessitates giving parties a chance to be heard and requires fairness in decision-making processes. By recalling the order to rectify the mistake of no valid service of notice, the Tribunal aimed to uphold the principles of fairness and ensure that the assessee was not condemned unheard. The decision to recall the order was based on the Tribunal's duty to act fairly and do justice in accordance with the law, rather than a review of the previous decision.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found that the order did not raise any legal issues or questions of law. Therefore, the reference applications were rejected, affirming the Tribunal's decision to recall the order for re-decision based on the principles of natural justice and the duty to ensure a fair hearing for the assessee.