IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA TAX APPEAL NO. 12 OF 2009 TRUPTI MARKETING LTD ... Appellant Versus ACIT - CIRCLE -1 AND ANR., ... Respondents Mr. P. J. Pardiwalla, Senior Advocate with Mr. Melwin Viegas, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. S. R. Rivonkar, Advocate for the respondents. Coram:- SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI & N. A. BRITTO, JJ. Date:- 7th November, 2009 P.C. Heard. 2. This is an appeal filed by the Assessee under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and is directed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji dated 22.12.2008. 3. The Assessing Officer disallowed the expenditure in the sum of Rs. 62,93,450/-, observing that the Assessee had not furnished sufficient evidence to support the same. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the said expenditure. The ITAT, in turn, has given further opportunity to the Assessee to substantiate the expenditure/payments towards procuring the advertisement materials were genuine and not through hawala transactions. In other words, the ITAT has remanded the matter for further inquiry. In doing so, in our view, no substantial question of law arises for consideration, in this appeal. However, the learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the appellant, submits that the observations of the ITAT to the effect that the amounts which were paid to the hawala dealers, viz. M/s. Naheshri Marketing Ltd., would come in the way of the Assessing Officer. We direct the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh, without being influenced, in any way, by the observations made by the learned ITAT in paragraphs 10 and 11 of the impugned order. 4. With the above directions, the appeal is disposed of. SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. N. A. BRITTO, J. ssm.