Revisional jurisdiction does not extend to a remand for fresh fact-finding on tax classification, absent a decided question of law.

A remand order directing fresh factual inquiry on the nature of goods, without finally deciding the tax classification dispute or any question of law, is not revisable under a jurisdiction limited to erroneous or omitted legal determinations. The Tribunal had merely set aside the assessment and remitted the matter for fresh findings on evidence, so the order did not itself determine the rate of tax. The revision was therefore held not maintainable and was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a revision lay against the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal's order remanding the matter for fresh factual determination and whether such a remand order could be treated as a decision on a question of law.

Analysis: The Tribunal had not finally decided the tax classification controversy on merits. It merely set aside the assessment and remitted the matter to the assessing authority for a fresh finding on the nature of the goods after considering the evidence. A revisional court could interfere only where the Tribunal had erroneously decided, or failed to decide, a question of law. An order requiring further fact-finding before classification and assessment is not an erroneous decision on law and does not by itself determine the rate of tax.

Conclusion: The revision was not maintainable and was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: A remand order directing fresh factual inquiry, without deciding any question of law, is not revisable under a provision conferring revisional jurisdiction only where the Tribunal has decided erroneously or failed to decide a question of law.

---