TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 1070
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation of recall of the order dated 16.03.2017 has been rejected by the Tribunal. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for revisionist that present dispute pertains to assessment year 2009-2010 where the assessing authority had concluded the proceedings issuing a demand of Rs. 469391/- upon the revisionist. The revisionist against the aforesaid assessment had preferred a first appeal which was substantially allowed and the tax liability of Rs. 150634/- was reduced. The revisionist has subsequently filed second appeal before the Commercial Tax Tribunal which was decided ex-parte on 16.03.2017. 4. It is the case of the revisionist that the order dated 16.03.2017 was never served upon the revisionist as provided for under the Value Add....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... submits that the duty lay upon the respondents for communicating the order passed by the Tribunal as provided for under Rule 63(7) of U.P. VAT Rules and such a copy has not been received by the revisionist and a valid ground for condonation of delay in moving the application for rectification has been taken. 8. Learned Standing Counsel has opposed the writ petition but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 9. Accordingly, the facts of the present case are not disputed where initially the assessment relating to the assessment year 2009-2010 was concluded by issuance of a demand of Rs. 469391/- of the revisionist against which the first appeal was substantially allowed and his demand was reduced by Rs. 150634/-. The revisionist being aggr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... decide an appeal after giving parties a reasonable opportunity to be heard. When a case has been decided in absence without any opportunity to a party, power has to be conceded to Tribunal to set aside the ex parte order and again decide the matter carrying out the mandate as given in Section 10(5). Conceding such a jurisdiction by Tribunal will facilitate decision of a case in accordance with law. When an authority has power or decide an appeal, all such ancillary and incidental power has to be read into the jurisdiction which may help in exercise of jurisdiction in accordance with law. 26. In (1996) 6 SCC 92 (J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise), the apex Court had occasion to consider jurisdiction of Gold (Control) App....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....trial Tribunal had the jurisdiction to proceed ex parte. But if sufficient cause was shown which prevented a party from appearing, the Industrial Tribunal had the power to set aside the ex parte award. The power to proceed ex parte. carried with it the power to enquire whether or not there was sufficient cause for the absence of a party at the hearing. 5. Rule 20 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules deals with cases where the appellant has defaulted. Rule 21 empowers CEGAT to hear appeals ex parte. The fact that Rule 21 does not expressly state that an order on an appeal heard and disposed of ex parte can be set aside on sufficient cause for the absence of the respondent being shown does not mean that CEGAT has no power to do so. Rule 41 gives ....