K. C. BHARGAVA, J. - (1.) The present revision has been filed by the assessee relating to the assessment year 1981-82 against the remand order dated August 29, 1987, passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad Bench I. According to the assessee the assessing authority had made the assessment order. An appeal was filed against the assessing order and the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) remanded the case to the assessing authority with certain observations. The assessee went in appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal. The Sales Tax Tribunal dismissed the appeal and refused to set aside the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) remanding the case to the Sales Tax Officer. Now the assessee has come in revision before this Court praying to set aside the order of the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad Bench I, on the ground that the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad Bench I, could have decided the controversy involved in the present case and should not have remanded the case to the assessing authority. The learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Standing Counsel Sri G. N. Tripathi have been heard. Before this Court it has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the order of the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad Bench I, should be set aside because the matter should have finally been decided by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad Bench I, and there was no need to remand the matter to the Sales Tax Officer. The learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that the order of remand was passed on August 29, 1987 and within the period of one year the assessment proceedings must have been completed. According to him in view of the law this revision has become infructuous and as such it should he dismissed. The learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Sarju Singh Amir Chandra 1983 UPTC 1146 in order to show that if the revision is filed and in the meantime fresh assessment order is passed, then the assessment order will have no effect and the revision can still be disposed of and cannot be said to have become infructuous. This case was decided on the basis of the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner, Sales Tax v. Drugmatic Chemicals 1983 UPTC 172. As this point is concluded by two judgments of this Court, it is not necessary for this Court to go into details of this arguments. In view of these two decisions it is held that the present revision does not become infructuous, even if the assessment order is passed after the remand order passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) which was confirmed in appeal by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad Bench-I. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, a perusal of the order of the Sales Tax Tribunal relating to the assessment year 1981-82 will go to show that the assessing officer has not recorded the finding about the acceptance or rejection of the firing period disclosed by the assessee. The Sales Tax Officer did not take into account the capacity of the kiln nor it gave any finding regarding the selling rates of bricks. The Sales Tax Officer determined the taxable turnover of the assessee, without even determining the production of bricks. The way in which the assessment has been made in these cases is really imaginary. The assessment order made in these cases are of extremely poor quality. The Tribunal in view of these findings affirmed the order of remand passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial ). A perusal of these observations will go to show that the matter could have been decided by the Sales Tax Tribunal or by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) because the matter was available before these two authorities and there was no need to remand the case to the Sales Tax Officer for reassessment. Therefore in view of these facts the order of remand passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad, is liable to be set aside and the case must go back to the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad Bench I, for deciding it afresh on merits. The revision is allowed. The order of remand dated August 29, 1987, is set aside and the case is remanded to Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad Bench I, for deciding it afresh on merits. There is no order as to costs. Petition allowed. .;