Tribunal remand power under section 66(5) extends to fresh assessment on an alternative tax basis already supported by the record.

Section 66(5) empowered the Tribunal to pass any consequential order necessary to dispose of the case in conformity with the High Court's judgment, not merely a formal order. Where the accrual basis of taxation failed, and the record already contained material showing that part of the sale proceeds had been received in British India, the Tribunal could validly remit the matter to the Income-tax Officer for reconsideration on the receipt basis under section 4(1)(a). The remand did not introduce a new case or circumvent the earlier reference decision, but allowed fresh assessment on an alternative basis already supported by the record. The Tribunal's jurisdiction to make the remand order was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after the High Court answered the reference against the assessee on the taxability of the sales under the accrual principle, the Tribunal had jurisdiction under section 66(5) to remit the matter to the Income-tax Officer to consider taxation of the same sale proceeds on the receipt basis under section 4(1)(a).

Analysis: Section 66(5) required the Tribunal to pass such orders as were necessary to dispose of the case conformably to the High Court's judgment. That power was not confined to a merely formal order, but extended to whatever order was necessary to give effect to the judgment within the limits of the case. The Department's case that part of the sale proceeds had been received in British India had already been found by the Income-tax Officer on the material then before him, even though no separate taxation on receipt basis had been made because the same sales had been brought to tax on accrual basis under section 4(1)(c). Once the accrual basis failed, the situation became one in which the assessment could lawfully be reconsidered on the footing of receipt, and the Tribunal could direct the Income-tax Officer to make the necessary enquiry and revise the assessment. This did not amount to introducing a new case or circumventing the earlier judgment.

Conclusion: The Tribunal had jurisdiction to make the remand order and its action was valid.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed because the Tribunal's order directing reconsideration of the receipt-basis taxability of the sale proceeds was within the powers conferred by section 66(5).

Ratio Decidendi: Under section 66(5) of the Income-tax Act, the Tribunal may make whatever consequential order is necessary to dispose of the case in conformity with the High Court's judgment, including a remand for fresh assessment on an alternative basis already supported by the record, so long as no new case is introduced.

---