Fresh tax remand cannot carry conclusive merits findings; adverse observations were set aside to ensure an uninfluenced reassessment.

A tax remand may stand where the assessee can present all contentions afresh and the assessing authority is required to decide the matter de novo in accordance with law; apprehended prejudice is not enough to invalidate the remand. However, where the appellate authority remands the assessment on all issues, it should not also record conclusive merits findings that may influence the fresh adjudication. Those adverse findings were therefore set aside, while the rectification order was not interfered with. The assessment dispute was left to be decided anew by the Commercial Taxes Officer without being influenced by earlier observations.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the remand made by the Tax Board to the assessing authority was liable to be interfered with on the ground of bias or illegality in the exercise of jurisdiction; (ii) Whether the findings recorded by the Tax Board in support of remand and the rejection of rectification required interference.

Issue (i): Whether the remand made by the Tax Board to the assessing authority was liable to be interfered with on the ground of bias or illegality in the exercise of jurisdiction.

Analysis: The proceedings arose from notices and assessment action under the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003, including action taken under Sections 25(1), 26(1), 55 and 61. The Court accepted that the matter had been remanded for fresh consideration and that the petitioner would have the opportunity to place all contentions before the assessing authority. The Court also noted that the authority to whom the matter was to be sent would act afresh and in accordance with law, so the apprehension of prejudice was not a ground to annul the remand itself.

Conclusion: The remand was upheld and was not set aside.

Issue (ii): Whether the findings recorded by the Tax Board in support of remand and the rejection of rectification required interference.

Analysis: The Court held that once the Tax Board had chosen to remand the matter for fresh decision on all issues, it ought not to have recorded conclusive findings on merits in paragraphs 6 to 10. Those findings were therefore liable to be set aside. The Court further held that the rectification order did not warrant interference, but the assessment controversy itself had to be decided afresh by the assessing authority without being influenced by earlier observations.

Conclusion: The findings recorded by the Tax Board were set aside, while the rejection of rectification was not interfered with.

Final Conclusion: The revision petitions succeeded only to the extent of deleting the Tax Board's adverse findings, and the matter was sent back for a fresh assessment by the Commercial Taxes Officer after hearing the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an appellate authority remands a tax assessment for fresh decision on all issues, it should not simultaneously record conclusive merits findings that may influence the assessing authority; the remand can stand, but the merits findings should be vacated to preserve an uninfluenced de novo determination.

---