Invalid service of notice justified recall of an ex parte revisional order and fresh disposal of the revision.

Valid service of notice was a foundational requirement before the revision could be heard, and the revisional authority treated the erroneous service report as showing that the assessee had not been served. That defect was regarded as a mistake apparent on the record under section 22 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, and the authority also had inherent power to recall an order passed without notice to a party entitled to be heard. The ex parte revisional order was therefore set aside and the revision restored for fresh disposal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revisional authority was justified in setting aside its ex parte revisional order and restoring the revision to file for de novo disposal where the assessee had not been validly served with notice.

Analysis: The validity of service of notice was a foundational for taking up the revision. The revisional authority found that the report of service was patently erroneous and that the assessee had not in fact been served. Such an error was treated as a mistake apparent on the record within the scope of section 22 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. Independently, a court or tribunal has inherent jurisdiction to set aside an order made without notice to a party who had a right to be heard. Since the order was passed in the absence of the assessee without valid service, the revisional authority could recall it and restore the matter.

Conclusion: The revisional authority had jurisdiction to set aside the ex parte revisional order and restore the revision for fresh disposal, in favour of the assessee.

---