- (1.) By way of these appeals, the department has challenged the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeals of the department. In all these appeals, following substantial questions of law were framed by this Court vide order dated 12.04.2004. "1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was right and justified in deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer in the net wealth of the assessee, on account of undisclosed credit balance in the books of the firm M/s Salas S.A. Of Geneva and on the basis of information supplied by Mr. John Ashlyn of M/s Salas S.A. Geneva? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was right and justified in setting aside the addition amounting to Rs.1,41,40,300/- 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the finding of the ITAT is perverse, contrary to the record and untenable in the eye of law"
(2.) The Tribunal in para 2 and 3 of the order has observed as under: "2. The factual position in all these cases is that the original assessment order under section 16(3) was set aside by the first appellate authority directing the Assessing Officer to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law, after hearing the assessee. The decision of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was challenged before the Tribunal and the claim of the assessee was allowed. The ld. Assessing Officer while passing the order on the directions of the first appellate authority made same additions. At this juncture, it would be relevant to mention that the additions were made to the net wealth of the assessee on account of undisclosed credit balance in the books of the firm M/s Salas SA of Geneva and the statement of Mr. John Ashlyn. The ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) reversed the orders of the Assessing Officer in view of the decision of the Tribunal. 3. After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant material on record, it is noted that the additions were made in income-tax assessments as well as wealth-tax assessments of some connected assessees of this group on the basis of the statement of Mr. John Ashlyn. Several orders have been passed by the Tribunal in such cases deleting the additions so made. It is found that the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) also overturned the action of the Assessing Officer on the basis of the Tribunal order in assessee's own case. In view of these facts, we are satisfied that the decision of the first appellate authority, being based on the Tribunal's orders, does not warrant any interference. Respectfully following the precedents, we uphold the impugned orders as announced in the open court."
(3.) The concurrent findings of fact given on the basis of earlier decision which was delivered by the Tribunal have attained finality and have not been challenged. In that view of the matter, we are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Tribunal.;