1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2282 OF 2009 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2726 OF 2009 Kantilal V. Vakharia ..Appellant. Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV ..Respondent. .... Mr. Pramod Kumar Parida with Mr. Anil Mishra i/b M/s. PKP Legal Solutions for the Appellant. Smt. Padma Divakar for the Respondent. ..... CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. 21st January, 2010. P.C. : The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has by its judgment dated 12th November, 2008 affirmed the order of the CIT(A) by which the assessee was denied the benefit of deduction under Section 80-O of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Years 1995-96 and 1996-97. The submission which has been made before the Court is that the Tribunal has not considered the provisions of Section 80-O as they then stood including explanation (2) to the provision. Since the order of the Tribunal prima facie did not indicate consideration of the provisions of Section 80-O as they stood at the material time, we had suggested to the learned counsel that it would be appropriate 2 in the facts and circumstances if the proceedings are remitted back to the Tribunal for a decision afresh. Both the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant and the revenue have agreed to this course of action. In the circumstances by consent the impugned order of the Tribunal dated 12th November, 2008 is set aside in order to facilitate a fresh decision on remand. The Appeals shall stand restored to the file of the Tribunal for a fresh decision. All the rights and contentions of the parties are kept open. Both the appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs. (Dr. D.Y.Chandrachud, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)