JUDGMENT
1. This is an appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee against the order dt. 15th April, 2002, passed by Tribunal, Indore Bench, in ITA No. 279/Ind/2000, for the asst. yr. 1995-96.
2. The appeal before the Tribunal was preferred by the assessee against the order passed by CIT, Indore, exercising powers conferred on him under Section 263 of the Act. From perusal of the order, it appears that at the end of para 2, reproducing the observations made by CIT, it has been held as under:
“This clearly indicates that CIT has not recorded any specific finding and he has rather set aside the proceedings to the file of AO for reconsideration. This means the order cannot be said to be erroneous as CIT himself is not sure whether this expenditure is allowable or not?”
3. In view of this finding, it appears to us that since matter itself was sent to AO by the CIT, no interference was thought fit by the learned Tribunal. However, learned counsel for appellant submitted that at the end while recording the result of the appeal, it has been mentioned in para 5 as under:
“In the result, appeal is partly allowed.”
He, therefore, submitted that ‘this causes some confusion to the Department.
4. If there is any confusion to the Revenue with regard to the interpretation of the order sought to be impugned, in this appeal, then a remedy is available to it by filing an appropriate, application for clarification. However, we do not find that any substantial question of law is involved in this appeal. Thus we decline admission but appellant shall be at liberty to approach the Tribunal to ask for further clarification as may be permissible to it in accordance with law.
5. With these observations, this appeal stands finally disposed of.