Mistake apparent from the record led to recall of an order where appeal grounds were wrongly treated as not pressed.

The Tribunal held that recording grounds No. 2 and 3 as not pressed was erroneous where the appeal papers only carried the remark "Not. P." and there was no signature of the assessee or authorised representative showing withdrawal. An affidavit from the director stated that no authority had been given to abandon those grounds, and the vakalatnama did not empower the representative to withdraw them. On that basis, the mistaken recording was treated as a mistake apparent from the record, and the earlier order was recalled only to the extent required for fresh adjudication of grounds No. 2 and 3.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's earlier order recording grounds No. 2 and 3 as not pressed suffered from a mistake apparent from the record and warranted recall for fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The order noted that the appeal papers merely bore the remark "Not. P" against the relevant grounds, but there was no signature of the assessee or the authorised representative evidencing withdrawal. The director's affidavit stated that no authorisation had been given to withdraw the grounds, and the vakalatnama did not confer power on the representative to withdraw them. On these facts, the recording that the grounds were not pressed was found to be erroneous and constituting a mistake apparent from the record.

Conclusion: The earlier order was recalled to the limited extent necessary for adjudication of grounds No. 2 and 3, and the miscellaneous application was allowed.

---