Incorrect factual assumption in Tribunal order led to remand for joint hearing of connected appeals.

The Tribunal's order was set aside because it rested on a mistaken factual assumption that the Revenue had not challenged the dropped duty demand, when the record showed a pending Revenue appeal. Since the order was founded on that incorrect premise, it could not stand. The matter was remanded for joint disposal of the connected appeals and for a fresh decision after hearing both the Revenue's appeal and the respondent's appeal together.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's order, founded on an incorrect factual assumption that the Revenue had not challenged the dropped duty demand, should be set aside and the matter remanded for joint disposal of the connected appeals.

Analysis: The Tribunal proceeded on the mistaken basis that the Revenue had not filed an appeal against the adjudicating authority's finding. The record showed that the Revenue had in fact preferred an appeal, which was pending. As the impugned order rested on a wrong factual foundation, it could not stand. The proper course was to set aside the order and direct that both the Revenue's appeal and the respondent's appeal be heard together and decided afresh.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for joint disposal of the connected appeals.

---