- (1.) THIS appeal preferred under s. 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (in short "the Act of 1961") by the Revenue is directed against Commissioner of Income -tax (Appeals), Bikaner [in short "CIT(A)" hereinafter] confirming the addition of Rs. 8,50,000 under s. 68 of the Act of 1961 by the AO to the income of the respondent assessee, has been allowed and accordingly, the aforesaid addition made by the AO stands deleted.
(2.) ACCORDING to the appellant following substantial (question) of law arises out of the impugned order of the learned Tribunal for consideration of this Court : "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in the law the learned Tribunal is legally correct in deleting the addition of Rs. 8,50,000 made by the AO under s. 68 of the IT Act, even when the assessee failed in proving the genuineness, creditworthiness and identity of the creditors and thereby in discharging its onus of proof -
(3.) THE relevant facts in nutshell are that for the asst. yr. 1990 -91 return was filed by the respondent assessee declaring income of Rs. 1,50,150 in the status of AOP. The assessment was made by the AO under s. 143(3) of the Act of 1961 names of the partners of the firm S/Shri Ali Mohd., Amar Nath & Kewal Krishan Kumar and accordingly, the income was further appeal, the learned Tribunal set aside the assessment with the direction that the assessment be made by the AO afresh in light of the evidence produced. The income assessed as aforesaid was maintained by the AO while passing the fresh assessment order dt. 28th appeal, the order passed by the CIT(A) has been set aside by the learned Tribunal. Consequently, the addition made by the AO as aforesaid stands deleted. Hence, this appeal.;