( 1 ) THIS is assessee petitioner s second journey to this Court on the question whether permission has been rightly granted by the Income-tax Appellate tribunal, Delhi Bench-C, ( in short, the Tribunal) to the Revenue to urge additional grounds of appeal,

( 2 ) FOR the assessment years 1991-92 to 1995-96, five appeals have been filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal. Separate applications dated 13/8/1999 were moved by the Revenue under Rule 11 of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal rules, 1963 ( in short, Tribunal Rules) seeking permission to urge the following additional grounds:

"1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A) has erred in not holding that the claim of enhancement in the liability of foreign loan on account of foreign exchange fluctuations debited in the profit and loss account by the assessee company was a capital loss. 2. On the basis of the facts of the case and on the principles of law, the learned COMMISSIONOR OF INCOME TAX (A) should have held that the liability to repay the increased loan amount due to the foreign exchange rate fluctuation was not a revenue loss and was thus not allowed to be debited in the Pandl account. "the said move of the Revenue was strongly resisted by the assessee. Originally, by order dated 30/3/2000, Tribunal admitted additional grounds with the following order:

"30/3/2000: After going through the request for admission of additional grounds of appeal filed by the department hearing both the sides, going through case law as well as written submissions made in this regard, we admit the additional grounds of appeal sought to be admitted by Deptt and treat these appeals as part heard to come up for hearing on 28/4/2000. however, reasons for admitting the additional grounds shall be incorporated in the order to be passed in appeals. "

( 3 ) AFORESAID order of the Tribunal was assailed before this Court in CWP no. 1884/2000. By order dated 15/5/2000, this Court held that reasons have to be indicated by the Tribunal first. It directed the parties to appear before the Tribunal on 4/7/2000 and place further material if any in respect of the acceptability of application for additional grounds. Tribunal heard the matter afresh and by impugned order dated 28/8/2000 accepted the Revenue s prayer holding that the grounds raised are legal and appear to have been left inadvertently. Further facts were not required to be investigated and would be necessary to correctly assess the tax liability of the assessee and therefore the additional grounds deserved to be admitted. Direction was given for listing the appeals in the month of October, 2000. It is of significance to note that an application ( CM 5965 of 2000 was filed in CWP 1884/2000 for "clarification". Same was dismissed by order dated 20/6/2000 holding that order passed in the writ petition is very clear as regards the follow up action to be taken by the parties. Appeals were listed before the Tribunal for hearing on 19/10/2000. Petitioner sought for adjournment on the ground that it had not received the order passed on the application for acceptance of additional grounds. Hearing was adjourned to 12/12/2000. This petition has been filed on 2/3/2001.

( 4 ) THE order dated 28/8/2000 of the Tribunal is under challenge in this writ petition. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, by admitting the additional grounds, entire assessment as was made by the assessing officer is sought to be reversed and changed. In essence, it is urged that though the Tribunal has no power or jurisdiction to enhance the assessment by deciding a ground taken in the original grounds of appeal or allowing the additional grounds sought for by revenue, ultimately the result would be that admission of additional grounds would have the effect of taking away the basis of assessment and increase the liability of the assessee which is not permissible. Tribunal has no power to enhance the assessment by completely rever