- (1.) HEARD Sri N.C. Misra, Learned Counsel for the revisionist and learned Standing counsel for the opposite parties.
(2.) THE revisionist has approached this Court against the order of Commercial Tax Tribunal dated 30.8.2011. By this order the Tribunal has remanded the matter back to the Assessing Authority. The revisionist has argued that there was no good ground available before the Tribunal to relegate the matter back to the Assessing Authority. He says that this will only be a wastage of time, money and labour of the revisionist. He has placed reliance upon paragraph 1 of the judgment in the case of M/s. Nehru Steel Rolling Mills, Muzaffarnagar v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, 1993 U.P.T.C. 407, decided on 18th January, 1993, the relevant portion of which reads as under: ... In may opinion a remand order should not be readily made, and it should only be made when for very strong reasons the authority cannot itself dispose of the matter on merits. It seems that these remand orders were made by the authorities merely to get rid of the case so that the authority could avoid going into the matter deeply and deciding the issue once and for all. This kind of attitude is to be deprecated. In business it is necessary that a businessmen should know where he stands so that he can arrange his financial matters accordingly. Judicial decisions in cases of businessmen must be rendered quickly so that the businessman can know the correct position and act accordingly. A businessman should not be kept on tenterhooks in the matter as has been done in this case, otherwise the time and skill which he would apply for developing his business will have to be diverted to looking after judicial matters. This will be against the interest of the nation which requires encouragement and development of business and industry. In the present case we can see that several remand order have already been passed and the Tribunal as a high judicial authority should have decided the matter on merits finally instead of again throwing the ball back into the court of the lower authorities. His Lordship in the above para has elaborated that the remand should not be made cursorily only to avoid the hard work and in depth inquiry into the matter. Sri N.C. Mishra says that the Tribunal has all the authorities to decide this matter.
(3.) THE argument of the revisionist is satisfactory. The Court feels that the Tribunal could have decided the matter. Accordingly, the order of remand dated 30.8.2011 is set aside. The Tribunal is directed to decide the matter itself after going into all the details and all the points on which the Tribunal had remanded back the matter. The Tribunal shall decide this matter expeditiously.;