ATUL GULATI vs. DCIT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . . ITA 679/2012 . . . ATUL GULATI ..... Appellant . Through Mr. Sanat Kapoor and Mr. Vikas Jain, Advs. . . . versus . . . DCIT ..... Respondent . Through Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, sr. standing counsel . . . CORAM: . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR . . . O R D E R . 18.12.2012 . . . Issue notice. . 2. Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, sr. standing counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent and states that affidavit is not required. . 3. The assessee challenges an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (?Tribunal?, for short) in ITA No.148/Del/2002. It urges that the Tribunal fell into error not deciding the additional ground permitted to be urged by it i.e. that the assessment made under Section 158BC on . 31.8.2001 was barred by limitation in terms of Section 158BE. The facts briefly are that pursuant to search on 8.7.99, the revenue issued a notice to the assessee which ultimately culminated in the assessing officer bringing to tax an amount of `1,94,17,012/- as undisclosed income. The assessee?s appeal to the Commissioner(A) was partly allowed and the matter was remitted on certain aspects. The assessee carried the matter in appeal further to the Tribunal. The revenue too filed a cross- appeal to the Tribunal. During the pendency of the appeal the assessee sought to urge additional grounds by an application dated 5.12.2006. The assessee relies upon certain order sheets entries of the Tribunal to say that the additional ground was permitted to be urged. Its grievance is that despite these order sheet entries, the Tribunal did not deal with the contention that the proceedings were barred by limitation under Section 158BE. . 4. This Court has considered the submissions. The extract of the order sheet would reveal that in fact the appellant?s additional ground was taken on record. However, the impugned order does not reflect any consideration of the question of limitation. Having regard to these facts the Court is of the opinion that the Tribunal should consider the contention with regard to the limitation issue and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. The impugned order is consequently set aside and the matter remitted for consideration on the question of limitation. The rights and contentions of the parties in that regard are expressly reserved. . The appeal is allowed in the above terms. . . . . . S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J . . . . . . . R.V.EASWAR, J . DECEMBER 18, 2012 . vld . . . $ 9 to 11 .