Fresh assessment on disputed yield upheld where the record lacked reliable material for determining actual rice bran oil yield.

Where the record did not provide a reliable basis to fix the yield of rice bran oil, remand for fresh assessment was permissible. The Tribunal found that neither the assessing authority's 20% yield figure nor the assessee's claimed yields was supported by logic, scientific calculation, or adequate material. In that situation, directing a fresh inquiry to examine the machine's age, the quality of rice bran, and the actual yield was a proper course. The High Court found no error in that approach and upheld the remand, answering the issue against the assessee and in favour of the Department.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in remanding the matter for fresh assessment instead of determining the percentage of yield of rice bran oil on the existing record.

Analysis: The Tribunal had found that neither the assessing authority's fixation of yield at 20% nor the assessee's asserted yields was supported by logic, scientific calculation, or adequate material on record. In those circumstances, the direction for a fresh assessment so that the relevant material concerning the age of the oil-extracting machine, the quality of rice bran, and the actual yield could be placed and examined was treated as a proper course. The Court found no error in that approach, as the issue involved factual determination requiring reconsideration of materials rather than acceptance of an unsupported figure.

Conclusion: The remand was upheld and the question was answered against the assessee and in favour of the Department.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the record does not furnish a reliable basis to determine a disputed factual issue in assessment, remand for fresh inquiry and assessment is permissible and does not warrant interference.

---