Additional evidence in tax exemption disputes must be admitted where fairness requires fresh consideration of the dealer's claim.

A dealer challenging exemption denial for second sales was entitled to have additional evidence received where the revised assessment rested on third-party material. The Tribunal should not have assessed the probative value of the new documents at the threshold; instead, it had to admit the material and examine the exemption claim on merits. Because the dealer sought to prove that purchases were made from a real and identifiable seller, fairness required a fuller opportunity to adduce evidence. The refusal to receive additional evidence and the consequent denial of remand was therefore unjustified, and the matter had to be remitted for fresh consideration.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in refusing to receive the additional evidence and in declining remand for fresh consideration of the dealer's claim for exemption from tax on second sales.

Analysis: The revisional assessment was based on material relating to third parties, and the dealer sought to place additional documents before the Tribunal to support the claim that purchases had in fact been made from the alleged vendor. The Tribunal, instead of receiving the material and examining it on merits, assessed its probative value at the threshold and refused remand. Since the dealer was seeking to substantiate a claim that depended on proof of purchase from a real and identifiable seller, fairness required that the additional evidence be received and the matter reconsidered. In these circumstances, a fuller opportunity to adduce evidence was warranted, particularly where the assessment had been revised on the basis of third-party enquiries.

Conclusion: The refusal to receive the additional evidence and the consequent denial of remand was not justified; the matter had to be remitted for fresh consideration.

---