Assessment which was completed u/s.143(3) was reopened and disallowance was made in respect of claim u/s 80IA of the Act.  Before CIT(A) the appellant challenged the jurisdiction u/ s 147 as well as on merits. CIT(A)  decided the issue on merits and held that as he is deciding on merits it is not necessary to  decide the issue on reassessment. Revenue filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee neither filed an appeal nor filed any cross objection. The asseee filed application under Rule 27 and challenged the reassessment proceedings.  The Tribunal held that when the CIT(A) has decided the issue, it is presumed that the issue is decided against the assessee hence the application under Rule  27  is held to be valid and accordingly the Reassessment was quashed. The Tribunal also affirmed the order of the CIT (A) on merit. On appeal by the revenue, dismissing the appeal the Court held that Rule 27 of the Income Tax Tribunal Rules would entitle a respondent who has neither preferred an appeal nor cross objections to relief on a point decided in favour of the appellant by the lower appellate authority. Court also held that the language employed in Rule 27 of the Rules is clear and it deals with cases where the respondent may support the order on the grounds decided against him. Rule 27 of the Rules states that though the respondent may not have appealed, he may support the order appealed against on any of the grounds decided against him. As pointed out by us earlier, the CIT(A) has recorded that the validity of the reassessment proceedings was hotly debated before him. However, the CIT(A) proceeded to take up the issue relating to the relief, which the assessee would be entitled to under Section 80-I of the Act and proceeded to grant the same on the close of its order and the CIT(A) would state that since the appeal has been allowed on merits under Section 80-I of the Act, there is no necessity for him to give a finding on the issue of reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act. Thus, the CIT(A) did not adjudicate the correctness of the reassessment proceedings, which was challenged by the assessee. It is deemed that the said issue was decided against the assessee and that the assessee was entitled to canvass the said issue before the Tribunal without independently filing an appeal in the light of the Rule 27 of the Rules. Therefore, the Tribunal was right in permitting the assessee to argue on the issue relating to the validity of the reassessment proceedings. (AY. 1996-97)