Final appellate authority may decide on merits and binding precedent barred works contract tax on tyre retreading materials.

A final appellate authority under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 may examine questions of fact and law, refuse to sustain a remand, and decide the dispute on merits when the matter can be finally determined. The text also states that the taxability of binding gum and rubber used for tyre retreading was already covered by binding Supreme Court precedent, so works contract tax could not be levied on those materials. On that basis, the revisional court found no illegality in the Tax Board's order and declined interference.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Tax Board was justified in interfering with the first appellate authority's remand order and deciding the appeal on its own findings; (ii) whether the import of raw materials such as binding gum and rubber for tyre retreading was exigible to works contract tax.

Issue (i): Whether the Tax Board was justified in interfering with the first appellate authority's remand order and deciding the appeal on its own findings.

Analysis: The Tax Board functions as the final fact-finding and final appellate authority under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 and is empowered under section 85 of that Act to examine questions of fact and law. The Court held that there was no legal bar preventing the Tax Board from examining the controversy on merits and from declining to sustain a remand when the matter could be finally decided.

Conclusion: The Tax Board was justified in setting aside the remand and deciding the matter itself.

Issue (ii): Whether the import of raw materials such as binding gum and rubber for tyre retreading was exigible to works contract tax.

Analysis: The Tax Board relied on the binding effect of the Supreme Court's ruling on the taxability of such imports in the context of tyre retreading. On that basis, it recorded that the controversy stood covered and that no such tax could be levied on the respondent-assessee in respect of the materials used for tyre retreading.

Conclusion: The levy of works contract tax on the import of binding gum and rubber for tyre retreading was not sustainable.

Final Conclusion: The revisional Court found no illegality in the Tax Board's order and declined to interfere, leaving the Revenue without relief.

Ratio Decidendi: A final appellate authority empowered to decide questions of fact and law may refuse to sustain a remand and decide the controversy on merits, and no tax can be upheld where the issue is already covered by binding precedent.

---