Appellate tribunal must decide merits and jurisdiction itself, rather than remand matters to await related Supreme Court proceedings.

The HC set aside the tribunal's remand order and held that, once seized of the appeals, the tribunal should decide them on merits rather than send the matter back to the adjudicating authority to await Supreme Court proceedings in Mangli Impex. The tribunal was directed to restore the appeals to their original position and determine the jurisdictional objection, including whether the DRI officer who issued the show cause notices had authority, independently of Mangli Impex. No opinion was expressed on the substantive merits of the appeals or on the tribunal's procedure beyond that direction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate tribunal was justified in remanding the matter to the original adjudicating authority to first decide the issue of jurisdiction after the Supreme Court proceedings arising from the decision in Mangli Impex.

Analysis: The remand order was set aside. The appeals before the tribunal were restored to their original position and the tribunal was directed to decide the appeals on merits, including the jurisdiction of the officer of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence who issued the show cause notices. The jurisdictional issue was to be considered independently, without being influenced by the decision in Mangli Impex. No opinion was expressed on the merits of the appeals or on the procedure to be followed by the tribunal.

Conclusion: The remand to the adjudicating authority was held to be unwarranted, and the matter was required to be decided by the tribunal on merits, including jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an appellate tribunal has seized of the appeal, it should decide the appeal on merits, including jurisdictional objections, rather than remand the matter merely to await or defer to related higher court proceedings.

---