M. N. VENKATACHALAIAH J.


We have heard Sri J. Ramamurthy, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, and Mrs. J. Ramachandran, learned counsel for the respondent The aspect on which the petitioner appears aggrieved is that the High Court, while sustaining the order of the Tribunal remitting the matter to the Income-tax Officer, proceeded to observe "by way of information" that the decision of this court in Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CIT 1981 (132) ITR 559 had settled the law on the matter. Sri Ramamurthy says that there having been subsequent decisions of this court on the same point, the Income-tax Officer should not feel bound to exclude from his consideration other---and according to Sri Ramamurthy, directly governing---later decisions on the same point. There appears no justification for this apprehension. It is implicit in the order of the High Court that the Income-tax Officer should dispose of the matter, on remand, in accordance with law. If there are subsequent binding pronouncements of this court in the matter, it is needless to say, the Income

-tax Officer will take due note of them With these observations, the special leave petition is dismissed.