Non-consideration of a material appellate ground on closing stock justified remand for fresh Tribunal decision.

Failure by the Tribunal to address a specific and material ground challenging the addition to closing stock was treated as a legal error, because merely paraphrasing the appellate findings did not show independent consideration of that objection. A general statement that the appellate view was clear and well considered was insufficient, particularly where the discussion appeared to concern a different stock issue. Non-consideration of a material ground at the appellate stage gives rise to a substantial question of law, and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision on that issue alone, with the remaining issues left undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's order was vitiated by failure to deal with the specific ground challenging the addition of Rs. 79,47,330 to closing stock, warranting remand for fresh decision.

Analysis: The ground raised before the Tribunal was a specific and material issue, but the Tribunal only paraphrased the appellate findings without showing how the challenge to the addition was independently considered. A general observation that the appellate authority's view was clear and well considered was held insufficient, especially since the discussion appeared to relate to a different issue concerning Hyderabad office stock. Non-consideration of such a material issue at the appellate stage gives rise to a substantial question of law.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision on this issue alone; the other issues were left undisturbed.

---