9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (6) TMI 120X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of hearing and the Tribunal had disposed of the appeal on merits. In the present application, the applicants have made a prayer to rehear the appeal after giving an opportunity of being heard. The miscellaneous application is duly supported with an affidavit sworn before the Oath Commissioner. The matter had come up for hearing last on 7th September, 1988 and the judgment was reserved. Before the order could be issued, a communication dated 23rd September, 1988 was received from the office of the Senior Superintendent of Post NDSW Division, New Delhi -110021. The said communication was received in the Registry on 26th September, 1988 to the effect that the registered letter No. 2049, dated 15th December, 1987 was served on the applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hear an appeal disposed of on the merits in the absence of any party who has been prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause from appearing before the Tribunal at the hearing of the appeal and directed the Tribunal to consider the application for restoration and rehearing of the appeal. 4. 120 I.T.C. 231 Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-IV v. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and Another. The Tribunal has inherent powers to set aside an ex parte order. 5. AIR 1976 Delhi 111 Jagat Ram Khullar and Another v. Battu Mal Where the Hon ble Delhi High Court had held that where the notice was sent by registered post, bare statement on oath by addressee denying the tender and refusal to accept delivery is sufficient to rebut the presumptio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ior Superintendent of Post Offices, NDSW Division, New Delhi -110021 to the effect that registered letter No. 2049, dated 15-12-1987 was delivered to the appellant on 16th December, 1987. Since this communication has been received after the hearing, in the interests of justice, we reopen the hearing and order that the matter will come up for hearing before the Bench on 31st October, 1988. The appellant has not contradicted the written communication received from the postal authorities. The learned Advocate had vehemently argued that there was no service of notice. The letter received from the postal authorities intimating that RL No. 2049 dated 15-12-1987 was delivered on 16th December, 1987 is reproduced below :- DEPARTMENT OF POSTS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
