JUDGMENT : M.R. Shah, J. There shall be formal order of admission of the present Tax Appeals. 2. The following substantial questions of law arise of for the consideration of this Court; (A) Whether the Appellate Tribunal erred in setting aside the order passed by the CIT(A) on the ground that CIT(A) had not rendered any decision on merits without appreciating the fact that due to total non-compliance on part of the assessee despite granting sufficient opportunities, CIT(A) did not have any material to further dwelt upon the issue and had no choice but to frame an order based on the finding, given in the ex-parte order passed by the Assessing Officer? (B) Whether the Appellate Tribunal erred in setting aside the matter to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication without taking into consideration whether there were justifiable grounds for making total non-compliance by the assessee before the CIT(A) as well as the Assessing Officer? 3. Shri Vivek Chavda, learned advocate waives service of notice of admission on behalf of the respondent - assessee in each of the Tax Appeals. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and as the issue involved in the present Tax Appeals are in a very narrow compass for which no further paper-book is prepared, Tax Appeals are heard today finally. 5. Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties at length. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee has heavily relied upon the decision of the Division Bench of Jammu and Kashmir High Court in the case of Nek Ram Sharma & Co. Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, 2011 115 Taxman 636 (J. & K.) in support of his submission that when the matters are remanded by the learned Tribunal to the learned CIT(A), it cannot be said that any substantial question of law arises in the Tax Appeals challenging such remand order. In the alternative, Shri Chavda, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee has requested to remand the matter to the learned Tribunal, in case this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal remanding the matter to the learned CIT(A) is without assigning any reasons and allowing the assessee to produce additional evidence. In the alternative, Shri Chavda, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee has requested to remand the matter to the learned Tribunal, in case this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal remanding the matter to the learned CIT(A) is without assigning any reasons and allowing the assessee to produce additional evidence. The aforesaid is vehemently opposed by Ms Mauna Bhatt, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the revenue. It is submitted that the impugned order of remand, which is not backed by any reasons and on the premise that the learned CIT(A) did not consider the issue on merits is only unsustainable and as such there is no perverse finding not supported by evidence and without appreciating the fact that neither before the learned Assessing Officer nor before the learned CIT(A) the assessee cared to produce any evidence/material. 6. Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties at length on final hearing of the Tax Appeals. For Orders stand over to 27/06/2018.