TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 648
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bhakaran Government Advocate COMMON ORDER DR. G. JAYACHANDRAN J. M/s.Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL), a Government of India undertaking, being aggrieved by the assessment orders passed under the CST Act, 1956, in respect of transit sales for the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18, preferred appeals before the Appellate Authority raising several grounds to challenge the disallowance of credit notes issued in connection with the said transit sales. 2. The Appellate Authority, vide proceedings dated 22.01.2016, passed a common order considering the nature of the grounds of appeal raised against the assessment order for each assessment year. In the light of Section 6(2) of the CST Act and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appeal on the ground of maintainability is erroneous. He argued that the reasons stated by the Appellate Authority for remanding the assessment do not fall within the meaning of "setting aside" an order, but represent a simple remand. He further contended that the adverse observations made by the Appellate Authority would directly prejudice the assessing authority, if it is directed to make a fresh assessment. He further submitted that in cases where multiple and complex reliefs are granted by the Appellate Authority, even if a portion of the assessment is set aside and remanded back for fresh assessment, the embargo under the third proviso to Section 58(1) of the Act will not apply. Consequently, the Tribunal has to necessarily entertain....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and remands the matter for fresh assessment. 10.In these tax cases, it has to be seen as to whether the appellate authority had set aside the order of assessment and directed the assessing officer to make a fresh assessment. On a reading of the order passed by the appellate authority dated 16.08.2016 especially from page 7 of the order, we find that the appellate authority has discussed the merits of the matter and in page 9 of the order has given four reasons as to why the case of the petitioner cannot be accepted. Thus, the decision taken by the appellate authority is on the merits of the matter and the assessment order stood confirmed by the said order and it was not set aside. Though in the last few lines of the order passed by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation application has also been dismissed. Hence, separate writ petitions had been filed for each assessment year challenging the dismissal of the rectification applications and those writ petitions are WP Nos.22588, 22591, 22592, 22590, 22594 & 22595 of 2026. 8. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the Department, while defending the order passed by the Tribunal, submitted that when there is a statutory bar against entertaining an appeal against a remand order passed by the Appellate Authority, the appeal preferred by the assessee before the Tribunal is clearly not maintainable. Therefore, the dismissal of the appeal has to be confirmed. 9. There are two primary issues to be answered in this case. Firstly, whether a composit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sider the matter afresh based on materials to be produced by the assessee. 12. Since the primordial issue has been sent back for fresh consideration, the order of the Appellate Authority falls within the purview of the proviso to Section 58 (1) of the Act, which places a statutory embargo on the Appellate Tribunal's power to entertain the appeal. 13. Insofar as the second issue is concerned, regarding the defence and justification raised by the assessee to maintain the appeal before the Tribunal and the allegation that the written submissions were not considered by the Tribunal, we concur with the view that an appeal before the Tribunal against an order of the Appellate Authority remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer for ....