https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173867 A second writ petition was held maintainable because the earlier petition sought different relief and the present challenge to the Tribunal's default dismissal had not been raised earlier; the delay was treated as explained rather than negligent. The High Court also recognised that a mandatory hearing requirement cannot be defeated by a rebuttable presumption of service from a returned registered cover, and that a tribunal may exercise inherent jurisdiction to recall an ex parte dismissal where notice was in fact not served or where denial of recall would deprive the party of the statutory opportunity of hearing. The dismissal order was quashed and the matter remitted for decision on merits. en-us Sat, 12 Mar 1949 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Sep 2015 18:27:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173867 A second writ petition was held maintainable because the earlier petition sought different relief and the present challenge to the Tribunal's default dismissal had not been raised earlier; the delay was treated as explained rather than negligent. The High Court also recognised that a mandatory hearing requirement cannot be defeated by a rebuttable presumption of service from a returned registered cover, and that a tribunal may exercise inherent jurisdiction to recall an ex parte dismissal where notice was in fact not served or where denial of recall would deprive the party of the statutory opportunity of hearing. The dismissal order was quashed and the matter remitted for decision on merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 12 Mar 1949 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173867