Fresh remand on all issues required where suppression of facts links limitation, penalty, interest, confiscation and certificate claims.

The Commissioner (Appeals) was required to decide the appeal afresh on all issues, but instead treated the remand as limited to limitation alone. That approach was inconsistent with the earlier remand because extended limitation, penalty under Section 11AC, interest under Section 11AB, confiscation and the request for a Rule 57E certificate all depended on the common allegation of suppression of facts. A fresh decision on the full set of issues was therefore necessary before final determination could be made. The order was set aside and the matter remanded again for reconsideration of all issues, with the connected appeals disposed of accordingly and one appeal dismissed as infructuous.

---

---

Issues: Whether the matter had to be remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision on all issues, including limitation, duty demand, interest, penalty, confiscation and the request for Rule 57E certificate.

Analysis: The earlier remand had required the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal afresh on all issues, but he treated the remand as confined only to limitation and did not examine the remaining questions. The order was therefore inconsistent with the scope of the remand. The questions relating to extended limitation, penalty under Section 11AC, interest under Section 11AB, confiscation and the Rule 57E certificate were all linked to the allegation of suppression of facts, which required a common factual and legal finding before any final determination could be made.

Conclusion: The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was set aside and the matter was remanded again for fresh decision on all issues. The connected appeals were disposed of accordingly, with one appeal dismissed as infructuous.

---