K.S. Jhaveri, J.

In both these appeals common question of law and facts are involved, hence, they are decided by this common judgment.

2. By way of these appeals, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the assessee and dismissed the appeal of the department.

3. This Court while admitting the appeals on 20.11.2017 framed following substantial question of law:

"In appeal No. 300/2017

(I) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned ITAT is justified deleting the addition of Rs. 5,40,69,558/- made by the Assessing officer on account of disallowance of claim of VAT reimbursement.

In appeal No. 301/2017

(I) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned ITAT is justified deleting the addition of Rs. 3,24,17,009/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of claim of VAT reimbursement."

4. Counsel for the appellant has taken us through the judgment of the Tribunal and contended that the Tribunal has seriously committed an error in allowing the appeal of the assessee and dismissing the appeal of the Department.

4.1 However, learned counsel for respondent has relied