Fresh factual verification and remand to de novo adjudication where exemption eligibility and tax liability could not be decided on the record

The dispute required fresh factual verification to determine whether the differential amount was commission or profit from mobile phone sales, and whether the assessee met the small scale exemption threshold on the existing record. As the appellate material was insufficient for a conclusive finding, the impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication after verification of records. The limitation plea was left open for reconsideration in the remanded proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether the disputed tax demand required fresh factual verification before final adjudication, and whether the appellant could be denied the benefit of the small scale exemption notification on the existing record.

Analysis: The dispute turned on factual questions, namely whether the differential amount represented commission or profit from sale of mobile phones, and whether the value of taxable services in the preceding financial year was below the threshold for exemption. Since these matters depended on verification of records at the original level, the appellate record was found insufficient for a conclusive determination. The plea of limitation was also left open for reconsideration in the de novo proceedings.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh decision after verification of facts. The limitation plea remains open.

Final Conclusion: The assessee obtained relief by having the adverse order annulled and the matter sent back for de novo adjudication.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the decisive controversy is factual and requires primary verification, the appellate authority may set aside the order and remand the matter for fresh adjudication rather than finally determining the liability on an incomplete record.

---