VIKRAM NATH, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, this revision is being disposed of finally at the admission stage itself in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
(2.) THE dispute relates to the assessment year 1998 -99. The questions of law framed by the applicant are as follows: Substantial questions of law: I. Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal, Bench -I, Ghaziabad, was justified in allowing the appeal, filed by the Trade Tax Department, and remanding the matter back to the assessing authority despite the fact that it is the last court for finding of fact. II. Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal, Bench -I, Ghaziabad, was justified in remanding back the matter to the assessing authority although the whole material and record were placed before it. III. Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal, Bench -I, Ghaziabad, erred in law in remanding back the matter to the assessing authority on the ground of opportunity to the Trade Tax Department despite the fact that on the said ground the matter can only be remanded to the first appellate authority. In effect the question of law which arises for determination is as to whether the Tribunal was justified in remanding the matter to the assessing officer instead of remanding it to the appellate authority, in view of the fact that the ground taken by the department before the Tribunal was that it had not been afforded due opportunity by the appellate authority.
(3.) THE submission of the learned Counsel for the applicant is that the assessing officer by order dated March 13, 2001 levied tax on the transformer at the rate of 10 per cent. On appeal by the dealer, the Deputy Commissioner (Appeal), Trade Tax, Ghaziabad held that there was no liability of tax either under Section 3F(2B)(l) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and as per provisions of Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and accordingly deleted the tax liability. The department filed a second appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the department and has remanded the matter to the assessing officer by the impugned order dated March 15, 2007.;