K.J. Shetty, C.J. - (1.) The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, Bench "B", has referred the following question for the opinion of this court: "Whether there was material on record in support of the Tribunal's finding that the Commissioner had not given his reasons for his satisfaction that the order passed by the Income-tax Officer was prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue? "
(2.) The assessee, M/s. Kashi Nath & Co., is a partnership firm. The firm was doing sarafa and pawning business. For the assessment year 1975-76, the Income-tax Officer determined its income at Rs. 77,599, There was no appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner but the Commissioner of Income-tax in exercise of his power under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act set aside the assessment order and directed the . Income-tax Officer to redo the assessment. But the appeal against the said order of the Commissioner has been allowed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has observed that the Commissioner has not given his reasons for his conclusion that the order of assessment was prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. In our opinion, the conclusion of the Tribunal is unassailable.
(3.) We may first refer to the order of the Commissioner. The preamble of the order states that the assessment order passed was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue inasmuch as the Income-tax Officer while completing the assessment for 1975-76 did not make detailed enquiries in respect of various cash credits appearing in the names of different ladies. He further did not obtain necessary details about the interest income from pawning.;