Tribunal vide order dated 20-2-2015, deleted additions made by Assessing Officer and partially remanded matter to file of Assessing Officer to consider related issues afresh.  Assessing Officer on 27-12-2016 drew up a draft assessment order and a final assessment order came to be framed on 31-10-2017. On appeal, Tribunal held that since Assessing Officer had full knowledge of order of Tribunal and pursuant to such knowledge, he framed appeal effect order dated 12-3-2015, remaining effect should also have been given on or before 31-3-2016 and, thus, draft order and final assessment order were barred by limitation. High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal. Followed, CIT v. Odeon Builders (P.) Ltd. [2017] 247 Taxman 184/393 ITR 27 (Delhi)(HC)(FB)  wherein the Court held that   while examining the issue of limitation, one would have to pose the question of when the department became aware of the order and not when the concerned Commissioner or Principal Commissioner may have been served or had derived knowledge. It proceeded further to observe that once a responsible officer of the department becomes aware of the order, the period of limitation would commence form that point in time.

In GE Energy Parts Inc. v. Dy. CIT [2019] 111 taxmann.com 56 (Delhi) (HC)  it is held that what is relevant is when the Commissioner representing the department before the Tribunal received the order, which in any event is generally made available in the public domain soon after the order is pronounced. (AY. 2005-06 to 2006-07)