TMI Blog2000 (12) TMI 12X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - - - - - Dated:- 7-12-2000 - Judge(s) : DR. B. P. SARAF., G. D. SHARMA. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by DR. B.P. SARAF C.J.-This is an appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the "Act") against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated August 31, 1999, by which the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (the "Tribunal") remanded the matter to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to decide the proper gross profit rate to be applied after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the assessee as well as the Assessing Officer and to pass a fresh order. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant, Ms. Sindhu Sharma, who submits that the Tribunal was not justified in remanding the matter to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity of hearing to the assessee and the Revenue. The parties before the Tribunal raised no legal issues. Nor did the Tribunal decide any legal issue, which might give rise even to a question of law not to speak of substantial question of law to justify admission of appeal under section 260A of the Act. Under section 260A of the Act, appeal lies to the High Court from an order passed in appeal by the Tribunal only if the case involves 'a substantial question of law". Sub-section (2) of section 260A mandates that the appeal should be filed in the form of a memorandum of appeal precisely stating therein "the substantial question of law involved". Sub-section (3) requires the High Court to formulate the substantial question of law, if it is sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Sons Ltd. v. Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd., AIR 1962 SC 1314, the Supreme Court, after considering a number of decisions on the point, laid down the following test for determining whether a question of law raised in the case is a substantial question of law or not: "The proper test for determining whether a question of law raised in the case is substantial would, in our opinion, be whether it is of general public importance or whether it directly and substantially affects the rights of the parties and if so, whether it is either an open question in the sense that it is not finally settled by this court or by the Privy Council or by the Federal Court or is not free from difficulty or calls for discussion of alternati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the instant case, as stated earlier, even a question of law does not arise, not to speak of a substantial question of law. Moreover, in the present case, by the impugned order, the Tribunal even did not finally decide the factual dispute between the parties. It only remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the controversy afresh after giving proper hearing to the parties. No substantial question of law or even a question of law can arise from such an order. It is clear from the foregoing discussion that this appeal under section 260A of the Act is wholly misconceived. No substantial question of law is involved in this case. In fact, not to speak of a substantial question of law, even no question of law is involved, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
