IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 
 . 
 . 
 . 
         ITA 1119/2010  
 . 
 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX                 ..... Appellant 
 Through: Mr. Sanjeev Rajpal, Advocae. 
 . 
 versus 
 . 
 ARUN KUMAR JAIN                                       ..... Respondent 
 Through: None. 
 . 
 CORAM: 
 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN 
 . 
 O R D E R 
                        13.08.2010 
 CM No. 14097/2010 
 This is an application for condonation of delay of 98 days in 
 refiling of the appeal. 
 Having heard learned counsel for appellant and regard being had to the 
 assertions made in the applications, we find sufficient cause for condonation of 
 delay and, accordingly, delay in refilling the appeal is condoned. 
 Accordingly, application stands disposed of. 
 . 
 ITA 1119/2010                                                        page 1 of 
 3. 
 . 
 . 
 ITA 1119/2010 
 The present appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income 
 Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, ?Act?) is directed against the order dated 
 17th July, 2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi        Bench 
 (for short ?tribunal?) whereby the tribunal in paragraph 3 has        stated as 
 follows:- 
 ?3.       Identical grounds were raised by the revenue in assessee?s own case in 
 ITA No. 2829/Del/08 for A.Y. 2005-06 wherein the ITAT Delhi Bench ?A? vide its 
 order dated 19.6.2009 has held that parties with whom the assessee had business 
 dealings had confirmed the transactions in the course of inquiry conducted by 
 the Assessing Officer and it could not be said that the transactions of the 
 third party belonged to the assessee to sustain the addition.  In the light of 
 the same, the order of the CIT(A) for A.Y. 2006-07 is also confirmed.? 
 . 
 . 
 Learned counsel for the appellant could not apprise us whether 
 the decision rendered by the tribunal on earlier occasion has been 
 challenged or not. 
 Needless to say, the controversy is covered by the earlier 
 decision of the tribunal on a factual score. 
 . 
 ITA 1119/2010                                                        page 2 of 
 3. 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 In view of the aforesaid, we are not inclined to interfere with 
 the appeal.  The appeal stands dismissed  in limine. 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 CHIEF JUSTICE 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 MANMOHAN, J 
 AUGUST 13, 2010 
 js 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 ITA 1119/2010                                                        page 3 of 
 3. 
 . 
 16 
 .