Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Tax Board had plenary powers under section 85 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 to remand the matter to the appellate authority, and whether any question of law arose from the remand order.
Analysis: Section 85(11) empowered the Tax Board to pass such order as it thought fit after hearing both parties, and section 85(6) indicated a wide appellate jurisdiction. On that basis, the Board's authority was not confined to confirming or reversing the order appealed against, but extended to making a remand where the circumstances of the case so required. Since the assessee's claim for set-off on diesel purchases required consideration of relevant facts by the appellate authority, the remand was within jurisdiction. Under section 86(3), a revision lies only on a question of law, and no such question arose from the impugned order.
Conclusion: The Tax Board was competent to remand the matter, and the revision disclosed no question of law.
Final Conclusion: The revisional challenge failed because the order of remand was within the Tax Board's jurisdiction and did not give rise to any revisable legal issue.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the appellate statute confers wide powers to pass such order as it thinks fit, the appellate authority may remand the matter, and a revision will not lie in the absence of a question of law.