ORDER
A.M. SAPRE, J.
1. This is an appeal filed by the CIT under Section 260A of the IT Act, against an order dt. 26th Feb., 2001, passed by learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (for brevity hereinafter referred to as Tribunal) in ITA No. 332/Ind/2000. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on following substantial question of law :
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in directing the AO to calculate the deduction under Section 80HHC on the amounts representing indirect cost (a) Rs. 44,81,595 and (b) Rs. 75,55,231 treating it as attributable to direct cost of the manufacturing activities of the assessee ?”
2. Heard Shri R.L. Jain, learned senior counsel with Ku. V. Mandlik, learned counsel for the appellant, and Shri G.M. Chafekar, learned senior counsel with Shri R.K. Sarda, learned counsel for the respondent.
3. At the outset, it may be mentioned that learned counsel for the appellant brought to our notice a decision rendered by this Court on 3rd Jan., 2005 in the case of this very assessee (respondent herein) in IT Appeal No. 11 of 2001 [reported as CIT v. Jyoti Overseas Ltd., wherein this Court while allowing the appeal filed by the CIT has remanded the case to Tribunal for deciding the, appeal afresh in the light of what this Court has observed in the decision. It is not in dispute that the decision rendered by this Court and the one to be now rendered by the Tribunal has a bearing over the question involved in this appeal too. In Other words, the parties to both the appeals being same except the change in assessment year and secondly, the issue being equally more or less identical in nature, we are of the considered opinion that this appeal be also remanded to Tribunal for its, decision along with ITA No. 203/Ind/2000, remanded by this Court by order dt. 3rd Jan., 2005, passed in IT Appeal No. 11 of 2001. The hearing and disposal of both the appeals, i.e., ITA No. 332/Ind/2000 and ITA No. 203/Ind/2000 by the Tribunal would be in the interest of both the parties. It Will also riot cause any prejudice to either because both the parties would be afforded an opportunity of being heard.
4. It is due to aforementioned reasons and keeping in view the order passed by this Court on 3rd Jan., 2005 in IT Appeal No. 11 of 2001 arid the issue involved in this appeal, we do not wish to examine the issue on merits at this stage in this appeal. We thus allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order dt. 26th Feb., 2001, passed by learned Tribunal in ITA No. 332/Ind/2000 and remand the case to Tribunal (ITAT) for hearing of the appeal on merits along with other appeal referred supra. Let this be done within six months as an outer limit. Parties to appear before the Tribunal on 28th Feb., 2005 to enable the Hon’ble Members of the Tribunal to decide the appeal as directed. No costs.
