Remand order in tax assessment upheld where fresh evidence could be led and no legal prejudice was shown.

Interference with a remand order was declined where the Tribunal sent the assessment back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after permitting both sides to lead evidence. The Court noted that the assessee had taken inconsistent stands on the cash payments and the alleged intermediary, but the remand did not finally confirm the addition or cause legal prejudice. As the order merely enabled reconsideration on the evidence on record, no illegality was found in the Tribunal's course, and the assessment was left to be decided afresh.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether interference was warranted with the Tribunal's order remanding the assessment to the Assessing Officer for fresh decision after considering the evidence on record.

Analysis: The appeal arose from an order of remand and not from a final restoration of the Assessing Officer's addition. The assessee had taken inconsistent stands at different stages regarding the cash payments and the role of the alleged intermediary. The remand merely afforded both sides an opportunity to lead evidence in support of their respective claims, and the Court found no illegality or prejudice in such a course.

Conclusion: Interference with the remand order was declined and the issue was answered against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the Tribunal's remand order failed, and the assessment proceedings were left to be decided afresh by the Assessing Officer.

Ratio Decidendi: An order remanding a tax matter for fresh adjudication, which merely permits both sides to produce evidence and does not finally prejudice the assessee, does not warrant interference in appeal, especially where the assessee has taken shifting stands on material facts.

---