Tribunal remand set aside where further evidence could have been called for, with appeals restored for fresh disposal.

The Supreme Court held that where the Tribunal considered the record insufficient, it should have called for further evidence itself and then decided the appeals on the merits rather than remitting them to the jurisdictional Commissioner. The remand to the Commissioner was therefore set aside, and the appeals were sent back to the Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in remanding the appeals to the jurisdictional Commissioner instead of deciding them on the merits after considering the material on record.

Analysis: The Tribunal had observed that a more detailed study and careful analysis of the discrepancies in the assessee's explanation were necessary, but the Court noted that if further evidence was required, the Tribunal itself could have called for it. In the circumstances, the proper course was for the Tribunal to hear and dispose of the appeals afresh rather than remit the matter to the Commissioner for re-adjudication.

Conclusion: The remand by the Tribunal to the Commissioner was set aside and the appeals were remanded to the Tribunal for fresh disposal.

---