( 1 ) THIS appeal has been directed against the judgment and order of the learned single judge dated December 24, 1997. (Vysya Bank Ltd. v. Appropriate Authority of Income-tax [1998] 233 ITR 560 ). The appeal was listed several times. None appeared for the appropriate authority.

( 2 ) HEARD learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the impugned judgment. The learned single judge has set aside the order of the appropriate authority on the ground that no reasonable opportunity has been given to the vendor and vendee and there are several discrepancies in the proceeding before acquisition of the property in terms of Section 269ud (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The learned single judge has specifically emphasised on the decision in the case of C. B. Gautam v. Union of India.

( 3 ) DURING" the course of the argument before the learned single judge, learned counsel Dr. Pal on behalf of respondent No. 1 also prayed that the matter be remitted to the appropriate authority to give fresh opportunity to the vendor and vendee. This prayer of Dr. Pal was also rejected following the judgment of this court in the case of Dwarkanath Chatterjee v. Union of India [1995] 213 I