Independent finding on marketability required before deciding excise dispute, with remand ordered for fresh determination.

An appellate authority must record an independent finding on marketability where that issue is material to the dispute; mere reliance on an adjudication order or an earlier High Court view is insufficient. The earlier reversal was treated as technical and not a merits determination on marketability. Because the challenged order did not separately examine the pleadings, evidence, or the adjudicating authority's findings, it failed to decide the issue properly. The absence of an independent determination justified setting aside the order and remitting the matter for fresh decision.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate authority had recorded an independent finding on the marketability of the intermediate product, and whether the matter required remand for fresh decision.

Analysis: The earlier reversal of the Punjab High Court decision was held to be on a technical ground and not as a determination of marketability on merits. On the present record, the order under challenge was found to have merely relied on the adjudication order and the earlier High Court view without independently deciding the question of marketability or examining the correctness of the adjudicating authority's findings. The question required determination on the basis of the pleadings and evidence.

Conclusion: The absence of an independent finding on marketability justified setting aside the order and remitting the matter to the authority for fresh determination.

---