Appellate remand cannot give the Revenue a fresh innings when the record already supports decision on merits.

An appellate remand is not justified where the books of account and relevant purchase and despatch particulars were already before the assessing authority and the objections had been examined in the assessment proceedings. The power of remand must be used sparingly and only for sound judicial reasons; it cannot be invoked merely to give the Revenue a fresh opportunity to build a new case by further enquiry from third parties when the appellate forum can decide the controversy on the existing record. The Tribunal should therefore have decided the appeals on merits, and the remand order was set aside as unwarranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the assessment and remanding the matter for fresh enquiry instead of deciding the appeals on merits.

Analysis: The assessment record showed that the books of account and the relevant particulars of purchases and despatches had already been produced before the assessing authority. The objections on which the claim was rejected had been examined in the assessment proceedings, and the addition of a fresh remand merely to enable further enquiry from the ex-U.P. principal and the transporter would amount to giving the Revenue a fresh opportunity to make out a new case. The power of remand is to be exercised sparingly and only for sound judicial reasons, not to avoid a decision on the existing material when the appellate forum is itself capable of adjudicating the controversy.

Conclusion: The remand order was not justified. The Tribunal ought to have decided the appeals on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Remand cannot be used to grant the Revenue a fresh innings where the material necessary for adjudication is already on record and the appellate forum can decide the issue on merits.

---