Valuation dispute and conflicting findings require merits adjudication, not refusal based on an earlier order.

Where the factual basis for a valuation deduction is disputed and lower authorities record conflicting findings, the appellate forum must decide the controversy on merits rather than decline adjudication by relying on an earlier order. The Tribunal had treated itself as bound by a prior decision without first resolving the nature and admissibility of the claimed deduction from the retail price. That approach was unsustainable because no factual findings had been made by the Tribunal on the decisive valuation issue. The proper course was to set aside the refusal to hear the appeals on merits and remit the matter for fresh adjudication after hearing both sides.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in declining to decide the appeals on merits on the ground that an earlier Tribunal decision bound it, and whether the matter had to be remitted because the factual findings on the claimed deduction from the retail price were at variance.

Analysis: The Tribunal treated itself as precluded from examining the controversy on merits by reference to an earlier order, without first resolving the disputed factual basis of the claimed deduction of Rs. 5,000/- from the retail selling price. The Assistant Collector and the Collector had recorded differing findings on the nature of the amount and its admissibility as a deduction for determining the assessable value. In that situation, the Tribunal was required to examine the controversy on merits instead of refusing to do so on the basis of res judicata or judicial propriety. As no factual findings had been recorded by the Tribunal, the proper course was to set aside its order and remit the matter for fresh adjudication.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's refusal to decide the appeals on merits was unsustainable, and the matter was rightly remitted for fresh decision after hearing both sides.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the factual foundation for valuation is disputed and the lower authorities have recorded conflicting findings, the appellate forum must determine the merits and cannot decline adjudication merely because of an earlier order on a similar issue.

---