TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in deciding an issue not specifically argued before the lower authorities and, if not, whether the matter required remand for fresh consideration after giving both parties an opportunity of hearing.
Analysis: The controversy before the revision court was confined to the validity of the Tribunal's approach in travelling beyond the point that was actually in dispute and deciding the matter on a different footing. The order under challenge shows that the Tribunal examined the applicability of section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 on a basis different from the issue that had been canvassed, namely the extent to which the turnover was covered by the E1 form. The court relied on the principle that a tribunal should not determine a new question without the parties having notice and a fair opportunity to address it. In support of that approach, the court referred to the principle that where the scope of consideration before the tribunal is limited, it is not required to go into other questions that were not before the authorities below.
Conclusion: The Tribunal's order was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh decision after hearing both sides on the newly raised question and any incidental or ancillary issues.
Ratio Decidendi: A tribunal cannot finally decide a question not placed in issue before it without affording the parties an opportunity to address that question, and where such a course has been adopted the proper remedy is remand for de novo consideration in accordance with law.
TaxTMI 
