JUDGMENT : ( 1. ) BY this reference under Section 256 (1) of the income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the Income-tax Appellate tribunal, Jabalpur Bench has referred the following question of law to this Court for its opinion : "whether on the facts and keeping in view the order of the A. A. C. dated 1-6-1978, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessment order was merged with the order of the A. A. C. particularly when the point of cash credit was not subject of appeal by the assessee before the A. A. C. " ( 2. ) THE material facts giving rise to this reference briefly are as follows : While framing the assessment for the assessment year 1975-76, the I. T. O. called upon the assessee to prove genuineness of his cash credits in different names in the accounts of the assessee. The assessee produced confirmatory letters from creditors which were accepted by the I. T. O. Aggrieved by a part of the order passed by the I. T. O. , the assessee preferred an appeal before the A. A. C. which was decided on 1-6-1978. Therefore, the Commissioner, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 263 of the act, set aside the order of assessment and directed the I. T. O. , to make a fresh assessment according to law. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal The Tribunal held that the order of the I. T. O. got merged with the order of the A. A. C. and the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to revise it under Section 263 of the Act. Aggrieved by that order, the revenue sought reference and it is at the instance of the Revenue that the aforesaid question of law has been referred to this Court for its opinion. ( 3. ) WHEN the reference came up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court on 1-2-1985, the D. B. directed that the reference be heard along with M. C. C. No. 99/80 which was to be heard by a larger Bench and where a similar question was referred to this Court for its opinion. ( 4. ( 3. ) WHEN the reference came up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court on 1-2-1985, the D. B. directed that the reference be heard along with M. C. C. No. 99/80 which was to be heard by a larger Bench and where a similar question was referred to this Court for its opinion. ( 4. ) AS held by us in M. C. C. No. 99 (80 The Commissioner of Income-tax M. P. II, bhopal vs. Shri K. L. Rajput (1987 M. P. L. J. 247), which we have decided today, the question framed by the Tribunal is too vide and it does not bring out the real issue which arose before the Tribunal We, therefore, reframe that question as follows : "whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Commissioner was not competent under Section 263 of the Act to set aside the entire order of assessment passed by the I. T. O. when that order was the subject matter of appeal preferred by the assessee before the A. A. C. " ( 5. ) FOR reasons stated in our Judgment delivered today in M. C. C. No. 99/80, our answer to the question framed by us is in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. ( 6. ) IN the circumstances of the case, parties shall bear their own costs of the reference. Order accordingly.