9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (7) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to the Tribunal, as a result of which, the Tribunal has stated the case and referred to this court for decision, the following question of law, namely : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing the Income-tax Officer to determine the amount of peak credit considering the sum of Rs. 34,000 al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces, the alternative contention of the assessee for its set-off against the intangible addition of Rs. 34,000 made for the assessment year 1960-61 was accepted by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the assessee was granted relief in respect of this item of addition made by the Income-tax Officer. Aggrieved by the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the assessee as well as the De ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly, the Tribunal set aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in respect of four items including the aforesaid item of Rs. 30,000 shown as item No. 3 in its order and directed the Income-tax Officer to re-examine the matter in the light of the directions given in its order. The Department felt aggrieved by the Tribunal's direction for re-examination of the aforesaid item of Rs. 30 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment year 1960-61, when the Tribunal in its earlier order had held that it was to be included in the income for the assessment year 1961-62 and not 1960-61. Admittedly, after the Tribunal's earlier order, in a reference (M.C.C. No. 356 of 1974 dated on 8-1-1980), this court held that this amount of Rs. 34,000 was assessable as income in the assessment year 1960-61 and not 1961-62 as had been held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30,000 (shown as item No. 3 in its order) disappears and, therefore, the conclusion reached by the Tribunal on this point was clearly not justified as also its ultimate direction to the Income-tax Officer for re-examination of this item on the basis indicated by it. As a result of the aforesaid discussion, our answer to the question referred is as under : " On the facts and in the circumstance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
