Branch transfer treatment and denial of cross-examination vitiated the Tribunal's order, leading to remand for fresh decision.

Tax could not be sustained merely because the sales were completed on the same day at Delhi, where lower authorities had already treated part of the turnover as branch transfer and the record did not support the finding that no Delhi godown existed; the liability on that basis was set aside in favour of the assessee. The Tribunal's order was also vitiated because it did not consider the assessee's grievance that cross-examination of a witness had been denied, a material omission given the sketchy reasoning and incorrect factual premise. The revision was allowed, the Tribunal's order was set aside, and the appeal was remitted for fresh decision.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the turnover of Rs. 20 lakhs could be upheld as taxable under the Central Sales Tax Act instead of being treated as branch transfer; (ii) Whether the Tribunal's order was vitiated for failure to consider the grievance that cross-examination of a witness was denied.

Issue (i): Whether the turnover of Rs. 20 lakhs could be upheld as taxable under the Central Sales Tax Act instead of being treated as branch transfer.

Analysis: The turnover was already found by the lower authorities to be partly exempt as branch transfer. The Tribunal sustained tax on the remaining turnover mainly on the basis that the sales were effected on the same day at Delhi. The finding that there was no godown at Delhi was also treated as unsupported by the record.

Conclusion: The sustaining of liability on the stated basis was not justified and was set aside in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the Tribunal's order was vitiated for failure to consider the grievance that cross-examination of a witness was denied.

Analysis: The complaint that no opportunity was given to cross-examine the witness was raised before the Tribunal, but it was not examined. The omission was relevant because the order was found to be sketchy and based on incorrect facts.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's order was vitiated for non-consideration of this material grievance.

Final Conclusion: The revision was allowed, the Tribunal's order was set aside, and the matter was sent back for fresh decision of the appeal.

---