- (1.) These two revision petitions have been filed by the Petitioner-Revenue against the order of the Tax Board dated 17.09.2003 whereby the Assessee's appeal to the extent of imposition of tax of '3,96,117/- for the assessment years 1997-98 and '3,25,150/- for the assessment year 1998-99 has been set aside. The Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) in the first appeal filed by the Assessee, rejected the same and held that the Assessee failed to establish that opening stock of goods shown in the trading account was of ST paid goods and, therefore, he imposed the tax liability on the Assessee by passing the impugned assessment order.
(2.) Learned Tax Board in the second appeal filed by the Assessee allowed the appeal to this extent and it appears from the said order that evidence of the goods being ST paid was produced before the learned Tax Board also, as would appear from page 5, bottom para of the impugned order. While accepting the version of the Assessee, the Tax Board for the assessment year 1998-99, at page 4 of the impugned order also found that in respect of imposition of tax to the extent of '1,79,812/- on some other issue, the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) had remanded the case back to the Assessing Authority, which portion of the order of Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) was upheld by the learned Tax Board also in the same order.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the Revenue, Mr. Sharad Tatiya submitted that the learned Tax Board ought to have remanded the case back to the Assessing Authority in these circumstances in its entirety and the evidence produced by the Assessee could not be accepted without the same being proved and without giving an opportunity to the Revenue to cross-examine such evidence produced by the Assessee.;