Jurisdictional objections in reassessment must be decided on merits before reopening can stand.

Jurisdictional objections to reassessment under section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, including limitation, existence of material for belief of escaped assessment, and recording of reasons before initiation, had to be decided on merits because they went to the root of the proceedings. The Tribunal's failure to adjudicate those foundational issues, and its reliance only on a limited ground, rendered its order unsustainable. The matter was therefore set aside and remanded for fresh decision on the specified jurisdictional questions, with relief granted to the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's order was vitiated because it failed to adjudicate the jurisdictional objections relating to limitation, existence of material to form a belief of escaped assessment, and the effect of the requirement to record reasons before initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948.

Analysis: The objections raised against the reopening proceedings went to the root of jurisdiction. The legality of the notice, the timing of approval, the existence of material for the formation of belief, and the need to record reasons were all foundational questions affecting the validity of proceedings under section 21. Since the Tribunal had not dealt with these issues and had declined relief only on a limited ground, its order could not be sustained. Where such jurisdictional questions are specifically raised, they must be answered on merits by the fact-finding forum.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh decision on the specified jurisdictional issues. The revision was allowed in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Jurisdictional objections that go to the root of reassessment proceedings must be adjudicated on merits, and failure to decide such material issues renders the order vulnerable to being set aside and remanded.

---