JUDGMENT (Per Prakash Krishna, J) These two Revisions are directed against the Common Order dated 6.3.1995 passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Aligarh in two connected Second Appeals No. 478 of 1989 and 479 of 1989. The dispute relates to the Assessment Year 1984-85 (U.P. and Central). The Applicant carries on the business of Foodgrains, Oilseeds etc. in its own account as well as on Commission Agency. Its Account Books have been accepted by the Assessing Officer. However, the claim of the Applicant that it made the purchases worth Rs. 9,61,352.21 on behalf of Ex-U.P. Principals in the course of interstate purchases, was not accepted by the Assessing Officer. However, the said claim was accepted by the First Appellate Authority. The Commissioner of Sales Tax challenged the order of the First Appellate Authority by filing Second Appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal instead of deciding the Appeal on merits preferred to remand the matter for re-consideration to the First Appellate Authority. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order, the present revisions have been filed. Heard the Counsels for the parties. The learned Counsel for the dealer-applicant submitted that the Remand Order was not justified. He submitted that the Tribunal has passed the Remand Order in the present case in a routine manner. He pointed out that the Remand Order should not be readily passed by an Authority. The Tribunal by passing an order of remand has failed to decide the dispute which it was required to decide. Reliance has been placed upon a judgment of this Court given in the case of Kashi Ram Munish Kumar v. CST (1987) 67 STC 358 . In the case of M/s. Nehru Steel Rolling Mills v. CST, (1993) UPTC 407 this Court has held that the Remand Order should not be readily made and it should only be made when for very strong reasons the Authority can not itself dispose-of the matter on merits. The Remand Order should not be made merely to get rid of the case. The attitude of the Authority to avoid going into the matter deeply was deprecated therein. In view of the above, the order of the Tribunal can not be sustained. Both the revisions are allowed in part. The Order of the Tribunal is set aside and the matter is restored back to the Tribunal to her and decide the Appeals on merits. No order as to costs.