ORDER : Ruma Pal, J. Leave granted. 2. In the impugned order, the High Court held that a tax revision case would not lie under Section 22 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 on the sole ground that the order impugned before the High Court was an order by which the Tribunal had remanded the matter to the assessing authority and no revision lay from such an order. As a proposition of law that is wholly incorrect. The remission may have been made after the Tribunal determined a question of law. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that, in fact, the Tribunal had not laid down any new principle but had merely followed the earlier decision of this Court and had remanded the matter for the purpose of redetermination of the issue of fact. 3. It is not for us to determine the question. The question will be determined by the High Court as to whether any issue of law exists which requires consideration by the High Court on revision. It is open to the parties to raise all issues regarding the maintainability of the revision application on merits as they may be advised. 4. The civil appeal is disposed of but without any order as to costs.