TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (7) TMI 728
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....T 1. None appeared for the assessee today. Nor anybody appeared for the assessee on 22-4-2003 and 29-4-2003, when the matter was listed for hearing. Therefore, we proceed to decide the matter ex parte. 2. On an application under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this Court :- "Was the Tribunal, under the facts and ci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion and added Rs. 92,535 as unexplained cash and Rs. 90,680 as unexplained silver ornaments weighing 31.706 kgs. as total income of the assessee. 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) deleted both the additions. This is with regard to assessment year 1985-86. For the assessment year 1986-87, the Assessing Officer found some discrepancy in the stocks and sales of silver ornaments. After considering all the asp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioned. 7. None appeared for the assessee. 8. Heard Mr. Singhi, learned counsel for the Department. The facts are not in dispute and after hearing both the sides, the Tribunal has set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the matter back to him to decide the issues involved afresh, after properly appreciating the evidence on record, that too, after hearing both the sides. While setting aside....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has not properly looked into the papers in the paper book which was submitted to him and he should reconsider his views and discuss the evidence which has been brought on record in the form of paper book. In our view, there is nothing wrong in the observations in the earlier order and at least it cannot be said that there was an apparent mistake in the order dated 29‑10‑1993 which can....