ORDER : S.H. Kapadia and B. Sudershan Reddy, JJ. Delay condoned. Leave granted. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the High Court had erred in not answering the question which, in our opinion, was the substantial question of law under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1962. 2. We quote here in below for the sake of convenience the said question: "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law and on facts in cancelling the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(a) and 273(2)(a) of the I.T. Act, on the ground that benefit under the Amnesty Scheme was available to the Assessee, particularly when subsequent to search operation, the Assessee itself had revised its returns on a number of occasions, which would go to show that the return was not voluntary?" 3. For the sake of clarity we also annex here the position of various returns filed for various Assessment years in question. Assessment Year 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 1. Original return filed on 3-3-1983 12-7-1984 28-6-1985 28-6-1985 Income declared Rs. 1,19,949 1,10,700 60,210 8070 2. First Revised return filed on 31-3-1986 28-11-1985 28-11-1985 31-3-1986 Income declared Rs. 44,58,688 1,22,460 72,220 79,460 3. Second Revised return filed on 29-9-1986 30-3-1986 31-3-1986 29-9-1986 Income declared Rs. 25,27,210 14,99,630 10,71,970 1,86,700 4. Third Revised return filed on 23-2-1987 23-2-1987 29-9-1986 25-2-1987 Income declared Rs. 24,98,769 16,96,350 6,54,572 9,67,830 5. Fourth Revised return filed on - - 26-2-1987 - Income declared Rs. - - 2,99,540 - 6. Original Assessment order passed on 23-3-1985 31-3-1986 30-3-1987 30-9-1987 Assessed Income Rs. 20,29,840 15,31,240 11,70,540 10,27,700 7. Reassessment order passed on 31-8-1987 7-9-1987,- - Ultimate Assessed Income Rs. 38,22,110 16,98,150 - - 4. Having considered the above chart with relevant documents we are of the view that the above question needs to be considered by the High Court. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matters are remitted to the High Court for fresh consideration in accordance with law. 5. Accordingly the Tax Appeal Nos.281-288 of 2005 stand restored to the file of the High Court. 6. The appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs.