Fresh adjudication required where service classification was unclear and binding Larger Bench precedent was not applied.

The nature of the services had not been clearly ascertained from the existing record, and the lower authorities had decided the matter without the benefit of the relevant Larger Bench ruling. In these circumstances, the demand could not be sustained on the existing adjudication. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the original authority for fresh adjudication after applying the Larger Bench decision to the facts and giving the appellant a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand could be sustained without first ascertaining the exact nature of the services in the light of the Larger Bench decision and, consequently, whether the matter required a fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The nature of services was not readily ascertainable from the existing record. The authorities below had also not had the benefit of the cited Larger Bench ruling while deciding the matter. In these circumstances, a fresh decision was required after applying the ratio of the Larger Bench decision to the facts of the case, with a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the original authority for fresh adjudication.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the relevant factual matrix has not been clearly determined and an applicable binding precedent was not considered by the original authority, the matter may be remanded for fresh decision after applying that precedent to the facts.

---