The doctrine of merger has limited application and would not lead to the conclusion that every item in one order would get merged in another order if the same is appealed or other order is passed in accordance with law.

JUDGMENT

Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. - Delay of 37 days' in refiling the appeal is condoned.

2. This order shall dispose of two appeals bearing ITA Nos.301 and 351 of 2015 as according to learned counsel for the parties, similar issues are involved therein. For brevity, the facts are being extracted from ITA-301-2015.

3. ITA-301-2015 has been preferred by the assessee under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") against the order dated 31.10.2014 (Annexure A-6) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'A', Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in ITA No. 1184/Chd/2013, for the assessment year 2008-09, claiming the following substantial questions of law:-

i) Whether there could be two assessment orders for one assessment year at a given point of time?

ii) Whether the original assessment order could have been received by the Tribunal, once it was defaced on the date of passing of the reassessment order?

iii) Whether the impugned orders are sustainable in view of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of [ Income-Tax Officer And Anr. vs. K.L. Srihari (HUF), K.L. Narayana (1992) 197 ITR 694 KAR ] and [ Income-Tax Officer And Anr. vs. K.L. Srihari And Ors. (2001) 250 ITR 193 SC ]?

iv) Whether the CIT(A) could pass two appellate orders for the same assessment year on the same date?

4. A few facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The assessee filed its return of income on 30.9.2008 declaring Nil income. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 8.12.2010 (Annexure A-1) by making an addition of Rs. 11,00,000/-. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, Annexure A-1, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [for brevity "the CIT (A)"]. During the pendency of the said appeal, the assessment was reopened under Section 147 of the Act by the Assessing Officer. Vide reassessment order dated 18.3.2013 (Annexure A-2), the Assessing Officer assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 7,45,80,229/-. Against the said reassessment order, Annexure A-2, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) vide orders dated 17.10.2013 (Annexures A-3 and A- 4, respectively) dismissed the appeal challenging the reassessment order dated 18.3.2013 (Annexure A-2) thereby reviving the original assessment order and allowed the appeal filed against the order dated 8.12.2010 (Annexure A-1). Being aggrieved by the orders, Annexures A-3 and A-4, the assessee filed appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 9.7.2014 (Annexure A-5) allowed the appeal and annulled the reassessment proceedings as well as the reassessment order. Still dissatisfied, the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal against the setting aside of the reassessment proceedings and that of reviving the original assessment order. The Tribunal vide order dated 31.10.2014 (Annexure A-6), dismissed the appeal. Hence, the present appeals by the assessee.

5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any merit in the appeals.

6. The reassessment proceedings were initiated to assess the income which had escaped assessment during the original assessment proceedings. Ordinarily, whenever an reassessment order is made, in that eventuality the original assessment order would cease to exist. There can be only one assessment. Once a particular income had been assessed and subsequently, it was found that certain income had escaped assessment, the Assessing Officer is empowered to issue notice under Section 148 of the Act and bring the escaped income or other income to tax which had been found taxable during such reassessment proceedings. It is clarified that in the reassessment proceedings, the income which had already been determined or assessed to tax is also added to the escaped income. If the reassessment proceedings were held to be invalid by the Tribunal or a