Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.,, v. DCIT, Circle-2(1),,

ITA 1834/DEL/2006 | 1998-1999
Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 183420114 RSA 2006
Assessee PAN AAACB4146P
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 1834/DEL/2006
Duration Of Justice 4 year(s) 9 month(s) 18 day(s)
Appellant Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.,,
Respondent DCIT, Circle-2(1),,
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 11-03-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted F
Tribunal Order Date 11-03-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 02-02-2011
Next Hearing Date 02-02-2011
Assessment Year 1998-1999
Appeal Filed On 23-05-2006
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH : F NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA HONBLE VICE PRES IDENT AND SHRI A.D. JAIN JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.1833 & 1834/DEL./2006 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1997-98 & 98-99) M/S BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD. VS. DCIT CO. CIRCLE 2(1) CORPORATE FINANCE BHEL HOUSE NEW DELHI. SIRI FORT NEW DELHI-110049. (PAN/GIR NO.AAACB4146P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K. SAMPATH ADV. REVENUE BY : SHRI J.S. NAURATH CIT(DR) ORDER PER A.D. JAIN JM THESE ARE ASSESSEES APPEALS FOR AYS 1997-98 & 98-99. SIN CE COMMON ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN BOTH THESE APPEALS THEY ARE BEING D ISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE THE FACTS ARE B EING TAKEN FROM I.T.A. NO.1833. 2. THE FIRST ISSUE IS THE ASSESSEES CHALLENGE TO THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN UPHOLDING THE REOPENING OF THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT OF THE A SSESSEE FOR BOTH THE YEARS. THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ISSUANCE OF RE-ASSESSMENT NOTICE AFTER THE EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS FROM T HE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS NO FAILURE ON THE P ART OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACT S NECESSARY FOR THE ASSESSMENT RENDERING THE NOTICES DEFECTIVE AND VOID AB INITIO. 3. IT HAS BEEN CONTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS SUBMITTED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY 1997-98 ON 2 6.11.97 DECLARING INCOME OF `756.48 CRORES; THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 143 (3) OF THE I.T. ACT ON I.T.A. NOS.1833 & 1834/DEL./2006 (A.YS. : 1997-98 & 98-99) 2 7.2.2000 AT AN INCOME OF `793.72 CRORES; THAT THE CIT (A) VIDE ORDER DATED 29.03.2000 GRANTED PARTIAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE; THAT TH E TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 20.3.2009 DECIDED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL ALONG WITH S AID APPEALS FOR OTHER ISSUES; THAT IN THE SATISFACTION NOTE RECORDED BY THE AO FOR REOPENING THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT THE AO RECORDED INTER ALIA THAT DEDUCTION U/ S 80-O OF THE ACT WAS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE ON GROSS RECEIPTS OF `630.92 LAKHS WITHOUT DEDUCTING THE PROPORTIONATE EXPENSES INCURRED TO EARN SUCH INCOME; THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CREDITED SIMPLE INTEREST IN THE ACCOUNTS ON CREDITS EXTENDED TO ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD (APSEB) IN RESPECT OF SUPPLIES MAD E TO VIJAYWADA TPS ALTHOUGH THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING PROVIDED FOR C HARGING COMPOUND INTEREST; AND THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS FOLLOWING MERCANT ILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING INTEREST ACCRUED TO THE EXTENT OF THE DIFFERENCE ON SIMPLE INT EREST AND THE COMPOUND INTEREST WAS REQUIRED TO BE BROUGHT TO TAX; THAT THE CIT( A) APPROVED THE PROPOSAL OF THE AO OBSERVING THAT IN BOTH THE YEARS THERE WAS PRIMA FACIE CASE FOR TAKING ACTION U/S 148 OF THE ACT; THAT THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE AO HIMSELF SHOWS THAT THERE WAS NO NEW MATERIAL RECEIVED BY HIM FOR RECORDING THE SATISFACTION NOTE; THAT EVEN IN THE SATISFACTION NOTE THERE IS NO ALLEGATION BY T HE AO OF ANY FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN DISCLOSING FULLY AND TRULY THE M ATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR THE ASSESSMENT; AND ONLY THE FILE WAS PERUSED AGAIN AFTER THE C OMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT; THAT IN CIT VS. INDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZERS COOPERATIVE LTD. 177 TAXMAN 379 (DEL.) (COPY PLACED ON RECORD) IT HAS BEEN H ELD THAT ACTION UNDER SECTION 147/148 OF THE ACT AFTER EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS F ROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS NOT JUSTIFIED WHERE IN THE REASONS RECOR DED FOR REOPENING THERE IS NO ALLEGATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO DISCLOSE FULLY OR TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ASSESSMENT. IT HAS BEEN CONTENDED THAT FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR (1997-98) IN THE PRESENT CAS E EXPIRED ON 31.3.2002; THAT THE APPROVAL OF THE AOS SATISFACTION FOR REOPENING THE COMPLETED I.T.A. NOS.1833 & 1834/DEL./2006 (A.YS. : 1997-98 & 98-99) 3 RE-ASSESSMENT WAS GRANTED ON 04.03.04; THAT AS SUCH T HE COMMISSIONERS APPROVAL WAS BELATED BY TWO YEARS; AND THAT AS SUCH THE RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEING IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISO TO SEC TION 147 OF THE ACT THE SAME BE QUASHED. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND SUPPORTING THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN T HIS REGARD LD.DR HAS CONTENDED THAT AS IS CLEAR FROM THE SATISFACTION NOTE REC ORDED BY THE AO THE DEDUCTION U/S 80-O OF THE ACT WAS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE ON GROSS RECEIPTS OF `630.92 CRORES WITHOUT DEDUCTING THE PROPORTIONATE EXPENS ES INCURRED TO EARN SUCH INCOME; THAT AS ON THE DATES OF THE FILING OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THESE YEARS THE LAW WAS THAT DEDUCTION U/S 80-O OF THE ACT WAS TO BE ON THE NET RECEIPTS AND NOT ON GROSS RECEIPTS; THAT THEN AS AVAILABLE FROM THE SATI SFACTION NOTE THE ASSESSEE HAD CREDITED SIMPLE INTEREST ON CREDITS EXTENDED TO APSEB CO NCERNING SUPPLIES MADE TO VIJAYAWADA TPS DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE MEMORANDU M OF UNDERSTANDING REQUIRED COMPOUND INTEREST TO BE CHARGED; THAT THIS ITSELF WAS REASON GOOD ENOUGH TO REOPEN THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT. IT HAS THUS BEEN CONTEND ED THAT THERE BEING NO MERIT IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE THE SAME BE DISMISSED . 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES ON THIS ISSUE AND HAVE PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. UNDISPUTEDLY THE REOPENING OF THE C OMPLETED ASSESSMENT FOR BOTH THE CONCERNED YEARS CAME AFTER THE EXPIRY OF FOUR Y EARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS. THE ISSUE UP FOR CONSIDERATION IS AS TO WHETHER SUCH REOPENING OF COMPLETED ASSESSMENT FOR BOTH THE YEARS INVOL VED IS JUSTIFIED IN LAW CONSIDERING THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 147 OF THE ACT . SECTION 147 AND THE FIRST PROVISO THERETO OF THE I.T. ACT READ AS FOLLOWS: 147. IF THE AO HAS REASON TO BELIEVE THAT ANY INCOME CHA RGEABLE TO TAX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR HE MAY SUB JECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 148 TO 153 ASSESS OR REASSESS S UCH INCOME AND ALSO ANY OTHER INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX WHICH HAS ESCAPED ASSES SMENT AND WHICH COMES TO HIS NOTICE SUBSEQUENTLY IN THE COURSE OF T HE PROCEEDINGS I.T.A. NOS.1833 & 1834/DEL./2006 (A.YS. : 1997-98 & 98-99) 4 UNDER THIS SECTION OR RE-COMPUTE THE LOSS OR THE DEPRECIA TION ALLOWANCE OR ANY OTHER ALLOWANCE AS THE CASE MAY BE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR CONCERNED (HEREAFTER IN THIS SECTION AND IN SECTIONS 148 T O 153 REFERRED TO AS THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR) : PROVIDED THAT WHERE AN ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION (3) OF SECT ION 143 OR THIS SECTION HAS BEEN MADE FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR NO ACTION SHALL BE TAKEN UNDER THIS SECTION AFTER THE EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS FR OM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR UNLESS ANY INCOME CHARGEABLE TO T AX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR BY REASON OF THE FAI LURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE A RETURN UNDER SECTION 139 OR IN RESPO NSE TO A NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SUB SECTION (1) OF SECTION 142 OR SECTION 1 48 OR TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR HIS ASSESSMEN T FOR THAT ASSESSMENT YEAR. 6. THEREFORE AS PER THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 147 OF THE ACT IN A CASE WHERE A REGULAR ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED FOR AN ASSESSMENT YEA R SUCH COMPLETED ASSESSMENT SHALL NOT BE REOPENED AFTER THE EXPIRY OF FOUR Y EARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR UNLESS DUE TO THE FAILURE ON THE P ART OF THE ASSESSEE INTER- ALIA TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR THAT ASSESSMENT ANY INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. 7. IN THE PRESENT CASE UNDENIABLY THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENTS FOR BOTH THE YEARS HAVE BEEN REOPENED BEYOND THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD OF FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. HOWEVER THERE HAS BEEN NO AL LEGATION BY THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR EITHER OF THE ASSESSMENTS. A COPY OF THE SATISFACTION NO TE RECORDED BY THE AO AND THE CIT(A)S APPROVAL THEREON FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-9 8 HAS BEEN PLACED AT PAGE 77 OF THE ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK (APB) FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR 1997-98. THESE RUN AS FOLLOWS: SATISFACITON NOTE I.T.A. NOS.1833 & 1834/DEL./2006 (A.YS. : 1997-98 & 98-99) 5 M/S BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD. A.Y. 1997-98 THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 26.11.97 AT AN INCOME OF `7 56 47 81 570. SCRUTINY U/S 143(3) WAS COMPLETED O N 7.2.2000 AT AN INCOME OF `7 93 72 43 769. IT IS NOTED THAT THE DEDUCTION U/S 80-O WAS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE ON GROSS RECEIPTS OF `630.92 LAKH WITHOUT DEDUCTING THE PR OPORTIONATE EXPENSES INCURRED TO EARN SUCH INCOME. THE ASSESSEE HAD CREDITED SIMPLE INTEREST IN THE ACCOUNTS ON CREDITS EXTENDED TO ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD (APSEB) IN RESPECT OF SUPPLIES MADE TO VIJAYAWADA TPS ALTHOUGH THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING PROVIDED FOR CHARGING COMPOUND INTEREST. AS THE ASSESSEE WAS FOLLOWING MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING INTEREST ACCRUED TO THE EXTENT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SIMPLE INTEREST AND COMPOUND INTEREST IS REQUIRED TO BE BROUGHT TO TAX. IN VIEW OF ABOVE I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE TRUE IN COME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT THUS PROCEEDINGS U/S 147/ 148 ARE TAKEN UP HEREBY SUBJECT TO APPROVE. SUBMITTED. SD/- DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1) NEW DELHI. IN BOTH THE ISSUES THERE IS A PRIMA FACIE CASE FOR TAKI NG ACTION U/S 148 OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT APPROVAL MAY BE GRANTED BY CIT-I DELHI. SD/- 3/3/04 CIT-I NEW DELHI. APPROVED AS PROPOSED SD/- 4/3/04 I.T.A. NOS.1833 & 1834/DEL./2006 (A.YS. : 1997-98 & 98-99) 6 8. A COPY OF THE SATISFACTION NOTE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1 998-99 IS CONTAINED AT PAGE 68 OF THE ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 19 98-99. THIS SATISFACTION NOTE AND THE CIT(A)S APPROVAL THEREON READ AS UNDER: SATISFACITON NOTE M/S BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD. A.Y. 1998-99 THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 26.11.98 AT AN INCOME OF `11 01 30 52 670. SCRUTINY U/S 143(3) WAS COMPLETED O N 20.3.01 AT AN INCOME OF `11 02 40 17 253. IT IS NOTED THAT THE DEDUCTION U/S 80-O WAS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE ON GROSS RECEIPTS OF `68.92 LAKH WITHOUT DEDUCTING THE PRO PORTIONATE EXPENSES INCURRED TO EARN SUCH INCOME. ALSO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CREDITED SIMPLE INTEREST IN THE ACCOUNTS ON CREDITS EXTENDED TO ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD (APSEB) IN RESPECT OF SUPPLIES MADE TO VIJAYAWADA TPS ALTHOUGH THE MEMORA NDUM OF UNDERSTANDING PROVIDED FOR CHARGING COMPOUND INTEREST. AS THE ASSESSEE WAS FOLLOWING MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING INTEREST ACCRUED TO THE EXTENT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SIMPLE INTEREST AND COMPOUND INTEREST IS REQUIRED TO BE BROUGHT TO TAX. FURTHER IT IS NOTED THAT THE 9 TH YEAR DEDUCTION U/S 80IA ON ACCOUNT OF NUCLEAR STEAM GENERATORS (TRICHY) AMOUNTING TO `6 30 00 0 HAS WRONGLY BEEN CONSIDERED WHEREAS THE SAME WAS BEING CLAIMED U/S 80-I I N EARLIER 8 YEARS. IN VIEW OF ABOVE I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE TRUE IN COME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT THUS PROCEEDINGS U/S 147/1 48 ARE TAKEN UP HEREBY SUBJECT TO APPROVE. SUBMITTED. SD/- DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1) NEW DELHI. THE SPECIFIC REASONS MENTIONED BY A.O. ADEQUATELY JUSTIFY THE PROPOSED ACTION U/S 148 OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. IT IS RECOMMEND ED THAT CIT-I DELHI MAY ACCORD THE APPROVAL NECESSARY BEFORE THE ISSUE OF NOTICES . I.T.A. NOS.1833 & 1834/DEL./2006 (A.YS. : 1997-98 & 98-99) 7 SUBMITTED PLEASE. SD/- 3/3/04 CIT-I NEW DELHI. APPROVED AS PROPOSED SD/- 4/3/04 9. IT IS THUS EVIDENT THAT FOR NEITHER OF THE YEARS HAS T HERE BEEN ANY ALLEGATION BY THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRU LY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ITS ASSESSMENT FOR THESE YEARS. NOW THIS IS IN DIR ECT VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. THE SAID PROVISO CARRIES A MANDATE WHEN IT EMPLOGS THE WORD SHALL IN REQUIRING THAT NO COMPL ETED ASSESSMENT SHALL BE REOPENED UNLESS INCOME CHARGEABLE HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR T HE REASON OF THE FAILURE OF THE ASSESSMENT TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY AL L MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ITS ASSESSMENT FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. NON-COMPLIANC E WITH THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 147 THEREFORE RENDERS THE REOPENING OF A COMPL ETED ASSESSMENT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISC LOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ITS ASSESSMENT FOR THE RELEVA NT ASSESSMENT YEAR VOID AB INITIO. MOREOVER IN THE PRESENT CASE AS DISCUSSED HEREIN ABOVE NOT EVEN AN ALLEGATION OF SUCH FAILURE HAS BEEN MADE AGAINST THE ASS ESSEE COMPANY BY THE AO FOR EITHER OF THE ASSESSMENT YEARS INVOLVED. RELIANCE BY TH E ASSESSEE ON INDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZERS COOP. LTD. (SUPRA) IS APT. THEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT WHERE IN THE REASONS RECORDED IN REOPENING THERE WAS NO ALLEGATION T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO DISCLOSE FULLY OR TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS N ECESSARY FOR ITS ASSESSMENT THE AO WAS UNJUSTIFIED IN TAKING ACTION U/S 147/148 AFTER TH E EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RESPECTIVE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. IN THE PRESENT CASE ALSO THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SHOW THE AO TO HAVE RECOR DED IN THE REASONS FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT FOR BOTH THE YEARS ANY ALLEGATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ITS ASSESSMENT EVEN I.T.A. NOS.1833 & 1834/DEL./2006 (A.YS. : 1997-98 & 98-99) 8 THOUGH BOTH THE ASSESSMENTS WERE REOPENED AFTER THE EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS. 10. THE CIT(A) HAS REJECTED THE ASSESSEES OBJECTION IN TH IS REGARD BY OBSERVING THAT THE RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE WITHIN LIMITATION SINCE THE NOTICES U/S 148 OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED WITHIN SIX YEARS FROM THE END OF TH E RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR AFTER TAKING APPROVAL OF THE CIT(A) AS STIPULATED IN SECTION 151 OF THE ACT. IN THIS REGARD IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO REPRODUCE HERE SECTION 1 51(1) OF THE ACT: 151. (1) IN A CASE WHERE AN ASSESSMENT UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) O F SECTION 143 OR SECTION 147 HAS BEEN MADE FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEA R NO NOTICE SHALL BE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 BY AN AO WHO I S BELOW THE RANK OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OR DEPUTY COMMISSIONER UNLESS THE JOINT COMMISSIONER IS SATISFIED ON THE REASONS RECORDED B Y SUCH AO THAT IT IS A FIT CASE FOR THE ISSUE OF SUCH NOTICE. 11. THUS SECTION 151(1) PROVIDES THAT IN A CASE OF A COMPLETED REGULAR ASSESSMENT A NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT IS TO BE ISSUED B Y AN AO WHO IS BELOW THE RANK OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OR DEPUTY COMMISSIONER ONLY IF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER IS SATISFIED ON THE REASONS RECORDED BY SUCH AO THAT IT IS A FIT CASE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF SUCH NOTICE. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 151(1) IN NO WAY OVERRIDE THE PROVISIONS OF THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. IT IS RATHER THE STIPULATION CONTAINED IN THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 147 AS DISC USSED HEREINABOVE WHICH TAKES PRECEDENCE AND UNLESS THERE IS AN ALLEGATION OF THE ASSESSEE HA VING FAILED TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR HIS ASSESSMENT NO COMPLETED ASSESSMENT CAN BE REOPENED AFTER THE EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS FR OM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. 12. THEREFORE FOR THE ABOVE DISCUSSION ALONE FOLLOWING INDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZERS COOP. LTD. (SUPRA) THE REOPENING OF THE COMP LETED ASSESSMENTS FOR BOTH ASSESSMENT YEARS 1997-98 AND 98-99 ARE CANCELLED. I.T.A. NOS.1833 & 1834/DEL./2006 (A.YS. : 1997-98 & 98-99) 9 13. SINCE THE REOPENING OF THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS HAS BEEN CANCELLED FOR THE PRIMARY REASON OF THERE B EING NO ALLEGATION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE OF NOT HAVING DISCLOSED FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS FOR ITS ASSESSMENT FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1997-98 AND 98-9 9 THERE REMAINS NOTHING FURTHER TO BE ADJUDICATED. 14. IN THE RESULT BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLO WED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 11.03.2011. SD/- SD/- (G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA) (A.D.JAIN) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DELHI DATED : 11.3.2011 SKB COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-V NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT) NEW DELHI. AR/ITAT