Assessing Officer made addition under section 68 of the Act. Tribunal set aside the order of the Assessing Officer. High Court admitted appeal and held that mere establishing of their identity and fact that amounts had been transferred through cheque payments, did not by itself mean that transactions were genuine and accordingly   restored addition made by Assessing Officer. On appeal to Supreme Court Court held that  an appeal before High Court is maintainable only on a substantial question of law however the  issuance of notice prior to admission without framing any substantial question(s) of law is not contemplated under section 260A of the Act. High Court has either to admit or not admit appeal. If the  High Court admits appeal then substantial question(s) of law has to be framed and respondent put on notice on such substantial question(s) of law, however, if High Court is of view that no substantial question of law arises, then appeal has to be dismissed. On the facts  the High Court did not formulate any substantial question of law at time of admitting appeal, rather appeal was heard on merits and in absence of formulating substantial question of law appeal was reserved for judgment, procedure adopted by High Court was not in consonance with what was contemplated under section 260A of the Act. Accordingly  judgment is set aside and matter is  remanded to High Court for reconsideration of appeal.  (AY. 2011-12)