9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (10) TMI 52X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chin Bench, has referred the following question for determination of this court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, namely : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in admitting the ground raised by the assessee and restoring the matter to the Income-tax Officer for proper disposal in accordance with law ? " The assessee had omitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion, 256(2). Though the question is one of law, it is unnecessary to deal with the matter in detail for the reason that the applicability of the decision in CIT (Addl.) v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd. [1978] 111 ITR 1 (SC) was the subject of consideration by the Supreme Court in Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688. The Supreme Court noted that the aforesaid decision had been render ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Rai Kumar Srimal v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 525, where the Bench presided over by Sabyasachi Mukharji J., said that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was entitled to admit new grounds or evidence either suo motu or at the invitation of the parties. If he was acting on the invitation by the assessee, there must be some ground for admitting new evidence in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tter on its merits. We do not, therefore, find any merit in the contentions raised by the Revenue, which according to us, stand concluded by the decision of the Supreme Court aforesaid. We, therefore, answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue, No costs. Communicate a copy of this judgment under the seal of this court and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
