OBUL REDDI, C.J. - In these two revision cases, we are not concerned with their merits as it is Mr. S. Dasaratharama Reddi's contention that the present Bench of the Tribunal cannot sit in judgment over an order made by an earlier Bench.

To appreciate the question raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, a few relevant facts may be stated. The petitioner preferred two appeals, Tribunal Appeals Nos. 593 and 594 of 1971 before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. A Bench of the Tribunal consisting of the Accounts Member and Departmental Member did not go into the merits of the appeals on the ground that they were satisfied that the Assistant Commissioner was not justified in disposing of the appeals in the manner he did. After quoting the relevant portion of the order of the Assistant Commissioner, the Tribunal observed :

"As an appellate authority he ought to have found a way of enforcing his superior authority and insisted upon the subordinate officer carrying out his instructions, by submitting the report called for by him. It is unfortunate that, instead of exercising the powers vested in him under law, he had to dispose of the appeal in that manner, which is reall