Remand on admitted facts and pure law issue held improper; Tribunal must decide the legal question itself.

A remand is improper where the material facts are admitted and the dispute turns only on a pure question of law, because the Tribunal should decide the legal issue itself rather than send the matter back for fresh assessment. The controversy concerned whether year-end payments were deductible from turnover under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, and no further factual inquiry was needed. The fact that each assessment year is independent does not justify avoiding determination of the issue raised in appeal. The remand order was held illegal and set aside, and the appeals were directed to be decided afresh in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in remanding the matter to the assessing authority for fresh adjudication when the dispute turned on admitted facts and a pure question of law.

Analysis: The revision challenged the Tribunal's order of remand. The material facts were not in dispute and no further factual inquiry was necessary. The only issue was whether the payments made at the end of the year were deductible from turnover under the U.P. Trade Tax Act. Where the controversy is confined to a pure question of law on admitted facts, the matter ought to be decided by the Tribunal itself rather than sent back for a fresh round of assessment. The fact that each assessment year is independent does not justify avoiding a decision on the legal issue arising in the appeals.

Conclusion: The remand order was held to be illegal and was set aside. The revisions were allowed and the Tribunal was directed to decide the appeals afresh in accordance with law.

---