Excise appeals must not be decided on a new factual basis; untested issues require remand for fresh consideration.

An appellate tribunal should not decide an excise dispute on a fresh factual basis that was not examined by the adjudicating authority. Here, the tribunal relied on the absence of buyer confirmation and on a view that goods need not be entered in the RG-1 register, although that foundation had not been tested below. Because the core issue whether non-accountal of the goods attracted confiscation and penalty was not decided on the correct factual and legal footing, the proper course was remand for de novo consideration. The impugned order was therefore set aside and the matter sent back for fresh adjudication.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in deciding the revenue appeal on a new factual ground not urged before the adjudicating authority and whether the matter required remand for de novo consideration.

Analysis: The Tribunal disposed of the appeal by relying on the absence of buyer confirmation and by holding that there was no need to enter the goods in the RG-1 register, although that factual basis had not been examined by the lower authorities. The appellate record showed that the Tribunal had shifted to a fresh factual controversy and had not addressed the core question whether the non-accountal of the goods attracted confiscation and penalty under the relevant excise rules. Where the appellate forum finds that the matter has not been considered on the correct legal and factual foundation, the proper course is to remit the matter rather than decide it on an untested factual premise.

Conclusion: The Tribunal ought not to have decided the appeal on a new ground and the matter was required to be remitted for de novo consideration. The appeal was therefore allowed and the impugned order was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: An appellate tribunal should not finally determine an excise dispute on a new factual basis not examined by the lower authority, and where the core issue has not been adjudicated on the correct footing, remand for fresh consideration is the proper course.

---