Coordinate bench consistency in trade tax set-off disputes led to remand for fresh Tribunal reconsideration.

Section 4-BB of the U.P. Trade Tax Act was treated as a statutory set-off benefit, and the record noted an existing circular on the subject. Earlier coordinate and Division Bench decisions had already granted the same benefit in similar matters, so the Tribunal was expected to follow that view and apply similar treatment. Because the impugned orders did not follow the earlier binding approach, they were set aside and the matters were remanded for fresh adjudication by the Tribunal after giving the assessees a reasonable opportunity of hearing and, if needed, permission to lead fresh evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to the benefit of set-off under Section 4-BB of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and whether the Tribunal was bound to follow the earlier coordinate/Division Bench view while deciding the similar revisions.

Analysis: The benefit under Section 4-BB was treated as a statutory benefit available to the assessees, and the record showed that a circular had already been issued on the subject. Earlier decisions in similar matters had allowed the same benefit, and the principle that similar matters should receive similar treatment was applied. Since the impugned orders of the Tribunal did not follow the earlier view, they could not be sustained. The matter was therefore required to be reconsidered afresh by the Tribunal after granting reasonable opportunity of hearing and, if necessary, permitting fresh evidence.

Conclusion: The revisions were allowed, the Tribunal's orders were set aside, and the matter was remanded for de novo decision in accordance with the earlier judgment and after hearing the assessees.

Final Conclusion: The assessees obtained relief from the adverse Tribunal orders, but the substantive controversy was sent back for fresh adjudication by the Tribunal.

Ratio Decidendi: A coordinate forum must follow the earlier decision in similar matters, and where that is not done, the proper course is to set aside the order and remand the matter for reconsideration after hearing the affected party.

---