https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193310 The Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that the Ld. CIT(A) had not set aside the assessment but only deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The High Court remitted the matter back to the Tribunal to determine if the CIT(A) had the power to remand the issue for reassessment post the provisions of Section 251 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal concluded that the CIT(A) did not have the authority to remand the issue to the AO and canceled the CIT(A)'s order, directing a fresh decision on the merits. Ultimately, the Revenue's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merits in accordance with the law. en-us Mon, 03 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Jul 2017 10:13:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193310 The Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that the Ld. CIT(A) had not set aside the assessment but only deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The High Court remitted the matter back to the Tribunal to determine if the CIT(A) had the power to remand the issue for reassessment post the provisions of Section 251 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal concluded that the CIT(A) did not have the authority to remand the issue to the AO and canceled the CIT(A)'s order, directing a fresh decision on the merits. Ultimately, the Revenue's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merits in accordance with the law. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 03 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193310