Tribunal held that  sub-S.  (6) of S.  250 mandates the CIT(A) to state the point in dispute and thereafter record reasons in support of his conclusion. The finding given by him indicated that the order was not in consonance with the mandate given in the Act. He had not made any analysis of the submissions filed by the assessee or the point raised by him during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, the order was not sustainable. The issue was remitted to adjudicate on the merits. Once the quantum proceedings were set aside, then the very basis to compute penalty was extinguished. The CIT(A) shall adjudicate the issue with regard to the levy of penalty after adjudication of the quantum appeal.(AY.2011-12)