2012 (12) TMI 377

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ese appeals we are concerned with the order of the Tribunal in ITA Nos.1879-1880/Del/2011, which are appeals filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal in relation to the assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02. The order of the Tribunal which is impugned in these appeals was passed in the second round of the proceedings. In the first round of the proceedings, it was the assesse who was in appeal before the Tribunal in ITA Nos.821-822/Del/2007 which were disposed of by the Tribunal by order dated 23.3.2009. This was an agreed order in the sense that both parties before the Tribunal (the assessee and the Revenue) agreed to the following: -     (a) that the assessee will not challenge the validity of the reopening of the assessment....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ay. 3. On these facts the Assessing Officer took the view that the facts remain the same as in the original assessment proceedings and there was no fresh evidence to support the assessee's contention that no cash purchases were made from Jindal Electro Casting Pvt. Ltd., Hissar, to the extent of Rs. 86,87,000/- for the assessment year 2000-01 and Rs. 2,42,71,186/- for the assessment year 2001-02. He accordingly repeated the additions of these amounts in the fresh assessments under Section 69C of the Act. 4. The assessee appealed to the CIT (Appeals) who took up the appeals for both the years together and passed a common order on 24.02.2011. The contention of the assessee before the CIT (Appeals) was that the additions were wrongly repeate....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessing Officer had no power to again bring the amounts of Rs. 62,37,000/- and Rs. 2,22,19,840/- to tax in the assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02 respectively. 6. As regards the balance of the additions, the CIT (Appeals) held that even according to the Assessing Officer there was no change in the factual position and not a single new fact was brought on record either by the Assessing Officer or by the assessee in the fresh assessment proceedings. He, therefore, held that additions to the extent of Rs. 24,50,500/- and Rs. 20,51,356/- for the assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02 respectively should be confirmed, as was done by his predecessor in the first round of proceedings. He held accordingly. 7. It was against the aforesaid order of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bstantially the additions made by the Assessing Officer. It did not prefer any appeals to the Tribunal against the relief of Rs. 62,37,000/- and Rs. 2,22,19,840/- granted by the CIT (Appeals) respectively for the assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02. The Tribunal was seized only of the appeals filed by the assessee against the additions sustained by the CIT (Appeals) in the first round of proceedings and, therefore, the restoration of the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh disposal was confined only to the additions sustained by the CIT (Appeals) in those proceedings. Matters which have attained finality cannot be re-agitated. The Revenue failed to file appeals before the Tribunal challenging the relief granted by the CIT (Appeals) i....