Penalty under trade tax law cannot stand without intent to evade tax; remand must be decided afresh.

In penalty proceedings under the U.P. Trade Tax Act for import of machinery without Form 31, the Tribunal had remanded the appeal but confined the appellate authority to two earlier decisions. The High Court held that this limitation was unjustified because later precedent clarified that, absent intention to evade tax, penalty could not be imposed. The remand directions were therefore set aside, and the appellate authority was required to decide the appeal afresh de novo, without being influenced by the Tribunal's observations.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate authority could be confined, on remand, to deciding the matter only in the light of two earlier decisions, and whether the matter had to be decided afresh without such limitation.

Analysis: The revision arose from penalty proceedings under the U.P. Trade Tax Act concerning import of machinery without Form 31. The Tribunal had accepted the factual findings but, while remanding the appeal, directed the appellate authority to consider only two specified decisions. The Court held that such a restriction was not justified because later decisions of the Court had clarified that, in the absence of any intention to evade payment of tax, penalty could not be imposed. The remand directions, therefore, could not stand.

Conclusion: The restriction imposed by the Tribunal was set aside and the appellate authority was directed to decide the appeal afresh de novo, uninfluenced by the Tribunal's observations.

---