TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (9) TMI 379
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eturned by the first appellate authority, has observed that manner of assessment by the taxing authorities is not correct, inasmuch as the working days ought to have been worked out treating it to be 300 working days, whereas assessment was made on the basis of lesser days of working and for such purposes the proceedings have been remanded to the first appellate authority. 2. It is admitted that the first appellate authority has concurrent jurisdiction with the assessing authority. This order of the Tribunal is assailed on the ground that power of Tribunal specified under Section 57 of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 is specific and does not contemplate an order of the nature passed in the present matter. With reference to Section 57(8)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y correct in remanding the case to appellate authority for decision afresh when all the material for deciding the case was available on record?" 5. In support of its plea the revisionist places reliance upon a judgment of this Court in Tata Iron & Steel Company Limited, 16/97, The Mall, Kanpur Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow, reported in 2006 NTN (Vol. 30) 399, wherein this Court relying upon previous judgment of this Court in Nehru Steel Rolling Mills Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, reported in 1993 NTN (Vol. 2) 31, observed as under in paragraph 13 and 14:- "13. This Court in the case of Nehru Steel Rolling Mills vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax (supra) has held as follows: "In my opinion a remand order should not be readily....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....upon a judgment of this Court in Sapna Steel Gram Smridha, Gwaliar Road, Jhansi Vs. Trade Tax Tribunal, U.P., Lucknow through President and others, reported in 2011 NTN (Vol. 45) 228, in which this Court has observed as under in paragraph 11 to 13:- "11. A remand cannot be ordered lightly. The Tribunal should not ordinarily remand a case merely because it considers the reasoning given by the Divisional Level Committee to be wrong. Such remand orders lead to unnecessary lays delays and cause prejudice to the parties to the case. 12. When all the material is available before it, the Tribunal should exercise its own discretion and decide the appeal. To exercise the power of remand lightly would cause unnecessary delay and prejudices result....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in Sub-section (8) of Section 57 of the Act of 2008, which reads as under:- "57.(8) The Tribunal may, if it has not already dismissed the appeal under sub-section (7), after calling for and examining the relevant records, and after giving the parties a reasonable opportunity of being heard or, as the case may be, after following the procedure prescribed under sub-section (5): (a) confirm, cancel or vary such order, or (b) set aside the order and direct the assessing or appellate or revising authority or the Commissioner as the case may be, to pass a fresh order after such further enquiry, if any, as may be specified, or (c) order such amount of tax, fee or penalty or other money as may have been realized in excess of the due amount....