Aggrieved by the action of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee preferred this appeal stating that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the issue on the basis of which the addition to the tune of Rs. 30,10,474/- was sustained was never raised by the learned Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings and was not the subject matter of the appeal before him and therefore, such an action cannot be sustained. It is further contended that when two views of two different high courts are available before the Ld. CIT(A), namely, one view expressed in thecaseof Ramachandra Rao (supra) of Karnataka High Court and the other review expressed by the Bombay High Court in thecaseof Humayun Sulaiman (supra), without assigning any reasons Ld. CIT(A) rejected the view taken in thecaseof Ramachandra row (supra), instead of considering the view favourable to the assessee.