TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 379X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd all facts and materials relating to determination of petitioner's liability to pay tax were available on record before the appellate authority. When the matter was carried further in appeal before the Tribunal, all relevant records were available with the Tribunal itself. The Tribunal, in such circumstances, could exercise its power in the manner specified in Sub-section (8) of Section 57 of the Act of 2008 - the enquiry contemplated in Sub-section (b) of Section 57(8) of UP VAT Act, is with regard to determination of facts which are not sufficient for determining the liability to determine tax. Materials for correct determination of liability to pay tax did exist on record. The Tribunal would not be justified in suggesting a differe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 58 of the U.P. VAT Act has been preferred by the assessee challenging a composite order passed by the Tribunal deciding Second Appeals 527 of 2016 (2010- 2011) U/s. 28(2) Provincial, 528 of 2016 (2010-2011) U/s. 9(2) Central, and 526 of 2016 (2010-2011) U/s. 9(4) Entry Tax. The Tribunal vide order impugned, while affirming the findings returned 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to do it itself. It is urged that the order of Tribunal suffers from colourable exercise of power and has occasioned failure of justice for the assessee. 4. The revision, accordingly, has been preferred on the following question of law:- (I) Whether the Tribunal being a last fact finding authority and empowered to examine the documents and law was legally 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, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 3-B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, this Court is satisfied that the material which was available on record before the Tribunal itself was sufficient to determine the tax liability of the Assessee finally on merit and no purpose would be served by remanding the matter before the Assessing Authority, as has been done in the facts of the present case. 6. Reliance is also placed 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 c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment the assessee preferred appeal and all facts and materials relating to determination of petitioner's liability to pay tax were available on record before the appellate authority. When the matter was carried further in appeal before the Tribunal, all relevant records were available with the Tribunal itself. The Tribunal, in such circumstances, could exercise its power in the manner specified 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 pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is expected to decide the matter, on merits. It has no power to pass an order of remand only because it is of the opinion that a higher tax liability ought to be imposed although revenue has decided not to prefer any appeal against the determination of tax liability. Remand would not be permissible unless it is eminently required for justifiable reasons. A Division Bench of this Court in M/s International Hospital Limited, Noida Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2006 (30) NTN 402, has reiterated the judgment delivered in Nehru Steel Rolling Mills (supra) and observed that remand order should not be readily made and should be ordered only for very strong reasons where the authority cannot itself dispose of the matter, on merits. The Tribunal co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
