1986 PLP 618 (PTD)

Where the Tribunal had set aside the order of the A.A.C. and remanded the case for fresh assessment to the Income-tax Officer on reaching the finding that from the state of accounts it was not clear as to what was the financial position in respect of the exempt and non-exempt activities separately and, hence, it was not possible to determine whether the assessee was entitled to the claims which it has made in respect of various items which have either been sustained or ` vacated by A.A.C, the Tribunal was justified in remanding the case, as it is quite plain that on the finding reached by the Tribunal, it had no other option but to remand the case to Income-tax Officer. N.S. Kale for Petitioner. B.K. Rawalfor Respondent. The question of law referred in this reference under section 256 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is as follows:-- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in setting aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and directing the Income-tax Officer to make a fresh assessment in accordance with law."

2. The reference relates to the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75. It appears that both the parties appealed against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner sustaining some of the disallowances and vacating the other disallowances. The Tribunal held that from the state of account as submitted by the assessee, it was not clear as to what is the financial position in respect of the exempt and non-exempt activities separately. It further held that in the absence of such clear-cut demarcation of the accounts between the two types of activities, it was not possible to determine whether the assessee was entitled to the claims which it has made in respect of the various items which have either been sustained or vacated by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Or this finding, the Tribunal set aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and remanded they, the for fresh assessment to the I.-T.O.

3. Learned counsel for the assessee has submitted before us that there was no dispute as to the facts before the Tribunal and the A Tribunal was wrong in holding that from the state of accounts it was not clear as t4 what was the financial position in respect of the exempt and non-exempt activities separately. Now the question referred to us does not pertain to the correctness of the finding reached by the Tribunal. We must accept the finding arrived at by the Tribunal for there is no question referred :o us seeking a challenge to that finding. We have only to decide whether on the finding reached, the Tribunal was justified in remanding the case. It is quite plain that on the finding reached by the Tribunal, it had no other option but to remand the case to the I.-T.O.

4. For the reasons given above, we answer the question in the affirmative in favour of the Department and against the assessee. There will be no order as to costs. M.B.A. Question answered in affirmative.