Remand for fresh adjudication after additional evidence requires rebuttal evidence and cross-examination to ensure fair fact-finding.

Where additional evidence introduces a new factual case, the adjudicating authority must give the opposite party a fair chance to rebut it through further evidence and cross-examination. The record contained extensive documentary material, and the assessee sought to meet the department's new case by rebuttal evidence and examination of wholesalers. In those circumstances, a fuller factual inquiry was required, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication so both sides could lead and test evidence effectively.

---

---

Issues: Whether the matter required remand for fresh adjudication after allowing additional evidence and affording the assessee an opportunity to rebut it, including cross-examination of wholesalers.

Analysis: Additional grounds were permitted and the department was allowed to rely on invoices said to show absence of returnability terms. In view of the voluminous documentary material and the assessee's request to meet the new case by rebuttal evidence and cross-examination, a fuller factual inquiry was considered necessary. The interests of justice required that the factual controversy be examined afresh by the adjudicating authority with both sides being given effective opportunity to lead and test evidence.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after considering the additional evidence and permitting rebuttal and cross-examination as sought.

Final Conclusion: The departmental appeal succeeded to the extent that the previous orders were set aside and the dispute was returned for de novo adjudication.

Ratio Decidendi: When a new factual case is introduced through additional evidence, and the opposite party seeks to rebut it by further evidence and cross-examination, a remand is appropriate to ensure a fair and complete adjudication.

---