ORDER SHEET ITA NO.17 OF 2009 IN HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE JCT LIMITED Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV,KOLKATA BEFORE: Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 2nd February, 2015. For Appellant/Petitioner : Mr.R.N.BAJORIA,Sr.Advocate MS.ANUPA BANERJEE,Advocate For Respondent : Mr.R.N.Sinha,Advocate Court : assessee has come up in appeal challenging order dated 19th September, 2008 insofar as same is related to assessment year 1998-99. relevant portion of impugned judgement and order drawn to our attention by Mr.Bajoria, learned Senior Advocate reads as follows : In view of different finding of facts by Tribunal for assessment year 1995-96 and 1996-97, remand report was called from Assessing Officer. In remand report Assessing Officer has concluded that advance given to Sonia International during 1995-96 were from over draft account from bank and not from own funds of company. On this remand report view of Ld.Counsel for assessee was that 2 matter has not been properly examined by Assessing Officer and he reiterated earlier stand that since Hon ble Tribunal in year 1995-96 have already held that loans were given from funds of company and not from borrowed funds this remand report may be ignored. On other hand, Ld. Departmental Representative placing reliance on remand report prayed for following order of Tribunal for assessment year 1996-97. We further find that department has gone in appeal before Hon ble High Court against order of Tribunal dated 25.4.2003 for assessment year 1995-96 while assessee has gone in appeal before Hon ble High Court against order dated 23.2.2005 for assessment year 1996-97. Both appeals have been admitted by Hon ble High Court and are still pending for disposal. In light of these facts of case and matter being subjudice before jurisdictional High Court, we are left with no other option but to restore matter to file of Assessing Officer to decide issue as per direction of Hon ble High Court. This ground is, therefore, allowed for statistical purposes. learned Tribunal restored matter to file of assessing officer because matter was subjudice before High Court in respect of assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97. They possibly did correct thing but situation has now changed. Mr.Bajoria drawn our attention to order dated 15th May, 2009 by which High Court remanded matter to Tribunal for hearing afresh. 3 We are told that learned Tribunal has already carried out order dated 15th May, 2009. very basis of order under challenge has now been knocked out. In circumstances, Mr.Bajoria submitted that appropriate course will be to remand matter to Tribunal to consider matter in accordance with law. Mr.Sinha, learned advocate appearing for revenue has no objection to course being followed. In that view of matter, appeal relating to assessment year 1998-99 is remanded to Tribunal for rehearing in accordance with law. appeal is, thus, disposed of. (GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA, J.) (ARINDAM SINHA, J.) ssaha AR(CR) JCT Limited v. Commissioner of Income-tax-IV, Kolkata