Remand for fresh merits review where Tribunal relied only on absence of recovery machinery and left core issues undecided.

The Tribunal's order was set aside because it had not decided the dispute on the substantive facts and law, but had relied only on the absence of a recovery mechanism. Since the record raised mixed questions of fact and law requiring consideration by the fact-finding forum, the proper course was to restore the matter for a fresh merits determination. The Tribunal was directed to hear both sides and consider all available contentions, including those relating to the excise provisions and the retrospective amendment relied on by the Revenue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's order, which set aside the adjudication primarily on the ground that there was no recovery machinery, could be sustained, or whether the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration on merits.

Analysis: The Tribunal's order did not adjudicate the controversy on the substantive legal and factual merits. The impugned decision rested only on the absence of a recovery mechanism, leaving the other contentions of both sides unexamined. In such circumstances, and particularly where the record showed that the dispute involved questions of fact and law requiring consideration by the fact-finding forum, the proper course was to restore the matter to the Tribunal. This would permit both sides to advance all available contentions, including those relating to the relevant excise provisions and the retrospective amendment relied upon by the Revenue.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration and disposal after hearing both sides.

---