Appellate decision must rest on record evidence, not an unverified hearing statement; Tribunal order set aside and remanded.

The Tribunal's dismissal of the Department's appeal was unsustainable because it rested on a factual statement attributed to assessee's counsel without supporting material on record. An appellate body must decide on the basis of the proceedings and evidence before it, not on an unverified assumption introduced at hearing. As the Tribunal relied on a new and undecided fact rather than the existing record, its order could not stand. The Madras High Court set aside the Tribunal's order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration on the merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the Department's appeal on the basis of a statement attributed to counsel for the assessee that amortised mould cost had already been included in the value of components, and whether the matter required remand for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The Tribunal's dismissal rested on a recorded statement said to have been made on behalf of the assessee, but the record did not disclose supporting material for that factual premise. An appellate determination must rest on the proceedings and evidence available on record, and not on an unverified factual assumption introduced at the stage of hearing. Since the Tribunal proceeded on a new and undecided fact and not on the existing material, its order was held to be unsustainable.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration.

---