- (1.) The revenue has preferred this appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'The Act') against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'B', Chandigarh (in short 'ITAT') passed in ITA/58/CHANDI/2007 dated 18.01.2008 for the assessment year 1998-99.
(2.) The revenue has claimed the following substantial questions of law:- "1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in law in holding the issuance of notice u/s 148 for the Asstt. Year 1998- 99 to be invalid 2. Whether in view of the express provisions of Section 69 A of the Act, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in holding that the jewellery declared in VDIS was not assessable in A.Y.1998-99 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 21,47,176/- made by the AO u/s 69A of the Act 4. Whether or not the assets disclosed by the Respondent under the VDIS could be assessed in the year of declaration if the tax on the declared assets was not paid -
(3.) Learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the issue raised herein stands concluded by decision of this Court in ITA No. 155 of 2008, Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana vs. Shri Prem Pal Prop. dated 14.12.2010. It is further not disputed that the learned counsel for the assessee in the present case before the Tribunal had relied upon the earlier decision of the Tribunal passed in the case of Shri Prem Pal vs. ITO, ITA No. 257/Chandi/03 against which ITA No. 155 of 2008 was preferred by the revenue. This Court in ITA No. 155 of 2008, while deciding the issues, held that the proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Act were valid and after allowing the appeals and setting aside the impugned orders, the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision in accordance with law.;