1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3932 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 23, Mumbai ..Appellant. Versus Prabhat Industries ..Respondent. Mr.P.S. Sahadevan i/by Ms.Padma Divakar for the appellant. Mr.Paras S. Savla with Ms.Renu Choudhari for the respondent. CORAM : Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud & J.P. Devadhar, JJ. DATE : 6 July, 2010. P.C. : 1. The question of law that has been raised by the Revenue in this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is whether the Tribunal was correct in considering the excise duty refund as income falling under the provisions of Section 28(iiib). Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue and Counsel appearing for the assessee are agreed in stating before the Court that in view of the decision of this Court rendered in Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Kalpataru Colors & Chemicals {Income Tax Appeal (Lodg) No.2887 of 2009 decided on 29 June 2010}, the proceedings may be remanded back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision on this issue in light of the 2 judgment rendered by this Court. 2. In these circumstances, in order to facilitate a fresh order on remand and in terms of the request made before the Court, the decision of the Tribunal on this issue is set aside and the proceedings are remitted back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision. All questions are kept open to be urged before and decided by the Tribunal. In view of this, it is not necessary for this Court to answer the question of law as framed. 4. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (J.P. Devadhar, J.) (Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud, J.)