Fresh reassessment after remand remains appealable when turnover is refixed and a new demand is raised.

A post-remand order that goes beyond merely giving effect to the remand and instead refixes turnover in entirety with a fresh demand is treated as a fresh reassessment order, not a mere consequential or rectificatory order. On that basis, the statutory appeal remains maintainable and should be entertained on merits. Recovery proceedings were set aside subject to deposit of the tax within the time granted, and recovery of penalty was stayed pending disposal of the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether an order passed on refixation of turnover and consequent demand, after the assessment had been set aside in entirety and remitted for fresh consideration, was merely a consequential order or an appealable reassessment order; and whether recovery proceedings and penalty could be sustained pending appeal.

Analysis: The earlier order had set aside the assessment in entirety and remitted the matter for fresh consideration, particularly on the turnover covered by form XVII. The subsequent order dated 29.09.2009 did not confine itself to giving effect to the remand on that limited aspect alone, but resulted in refixation of turnover in entirety and a fresh demand. On that footing, it could not be treated as a mere consequential or rectificatory order. The reliance placed on the decision holding that a true rectification order under the appeal provisions was not appealable was distinguished, because the order in question here had the character of a fresh reassessment. In those circumstances, the assessee was entitled to have the appeal entertained, while recovery of penalty could be stayed pending compliance with the condition imposed.

Conclusion: The order was held to be appealable and not a mere consequential order. The writ petition was allowed, the recovery proceedings were quashed subject to deposit of the tax within the time granted, and the appellate authority was directed to entertain and decide the appeal on merits; recovery of penalty was stayed in the meantime.

Final Conclusion: The assessee obtained conditional relief, with the impugned recovery set aside and the statutory appeal directed to be heard on merits after deposit of the tax.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a post-remand order goes beyond a mere giving effect exercise and results in fresh refixation of turnover and demand, it is not a non-appealable consequential order and the assessee must be permitted to pursue the statutory appeal.

---