JUDGMENT
T.D. Sugla, J.
1. The questions of law raised in this reference at the instance of the Department are:
“R.A. No. 1707 (Bom) of 1973-74:
(i) whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the scheme of amalgamation between New Shorrock Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd., and the assessee, any sum could be assessed in the hands of the assessee as capital gains having accrued to it by exchange or relinquishment as provided in section 12B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ?
(ii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax Bombay City-I. Bombay, dated May 12, 1964 ?
R.A. No. 1708 (Bom) of 1973-74:
Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in setting aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, B-Range, Bombay, dated November 13, 1968, and restoring the appeal to his file for deciding it afresh in accordance with law ?”
2. Counsel are agreed that the first question in R.A.No. 1707 (Bom) of 1973-74 is concered by this court’s decision in CIT v. Rasikal Maneklal (HUF) [1974] 95 ITR 656, in favour of the assessee and that following that decision, we should answer this question in the negative and in favour of the assessee.
3. As regards the Second question in R.A. No. 1707 (Bom) of 1973-74, counsel are agreed that this question does not survive for consideration in view of our answer to the first question in favour of the assessee.
4. This takes so to the remaining one and the only question of law arising out of R.A. No. 1708 (Bom) of 1973-74 Shri Kolah, learned counsel for the assessee, submitted that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had disposed of the appeal long back, which order has already been given effect to by the Income-tax Officer, Shri Jetely, for the Department, does not dispute this position. In the above view of the matter, this question has become of academic interest and, therefore, need not be answered.
5. In the result, the first question arising out of R.A. No. 1707 (Bom) of 1973-74 is answered in the negative and in favour of the assessee. The second question arising out of R.A.No. 1707 (Bom) of 1973-74 and the only question arising out of R.A.No. 1708 (Bom) of 1973-74 are returned unanswered.
6. No order as to costs.
