Gaurav Luthra, Agra V. I.T.O., Ward-2(1), Agra

ITA 278/AGR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 76573 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-06-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 04-06-2014
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 12-07-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: WASEEN ARSHAD
• Assessee Lawyers: MANUJ SHARMA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Period of limitation; Advance ruling; Revised return
• Section: 147; 246; 148; 6; 263; 144; 90; 153A

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.: 278/AGRA/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 PAGE 1 OF 11 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA [CORAM : PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND JOGINDER SINGH JM] I.T.A. NO.: 278/AGRA/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 GAURAV LUTHARA .APPELLANT 37, SAKET COLONY, SHAHGANJ, AGRA [PAN: AACHG1403P] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), AGRA .RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: MANUJ SHARMA, FOR THE APPELLANT WASEEN ARSHAD, FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : JUNE 4, 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : JUNE 4, 2014 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR: 1. THIS APPEAL, FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21 ST JANUARY 2011 PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (APPEALS)-I, AGRA, IN THE MATTER OF ORDER UNDER SECTION 267 R.W.S. 251 OF THE INCOME TA X ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. THE APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 4 DAYS BUT HA VING PERUSED THE CONDONATION PETITION AND HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS ON THE SAME, WE ARE INCLINED TO CONDONE THIS SMALL DELAY. ACCORDINGLY, WE ADMIT THE APPEAL AND PROCEED TO TAKE UP THE SAME ON MERITS. 2. TO ADJUDICATE ON THIS APPEAL, WE HAVE TO BEGIN B Y TAKING NOTE OF SOME UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS. THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US IS A TRUSTEE IN GURUNANK DEVJI TRUST, GURU GOVIND SINGHJI TRUST AND GURU TEG BAHADURJI TRUST. WHILE A DJUDICATING APPEALS IN THE CASES OF THESE TRUSTS, LEARNED CIT(A) HELD THAT THESE TRUSTS WER E NOT VALID TRUSTS SINCE THEY DID NOT COME INTO EXISTENCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 6 OF INDI AN TRUSTS ACT AND, THEREFORE, ITS INCOME SHOULD BE TAXED IN HANDS OF ALL THE TRUSTEES WHO WE RE SHOWN TO BE MANAGING AFFAIRS OF THE I.T.A. NO.: 278/AGRA/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 PAGE 2 OF 11 TRUSTS. IN PURSUANCE OF THE DIRECTIONS SO GIVEN B Y THE CIT(A) VIDE ORDER DATED 31 ST OCTOBER 2005, THE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED THE FOLLOWING OR DER ON 4 TH DECEMBER 2006 : IN ORDER TO THE VALUABLE DIRECTIONS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)- I, AGRA, VIDE HIS APPEAL ORDER NO. 428,430,427,429 AND 431/CIT(A)/ IT O 2(1) AGRA/2005-06 DATED 3 RD OCTOBER 2005, FOR THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NARRATED HE REINABOVE, THE INCOME SHOWN IN THE HANDS OF THE TRUSTS, HAS TO BE CONSIDE RED IN THE HANDS OF THE TRUSTEES IN THE EQUAL PROPORTION. SINCE THE AFORESAID ASSESSEE IS A TRUSTEE IN THE TR USTS, I.E. GURUNANAKDEVJI TRUST, GURU GOVIND SINGHJI TRUST AND GURU TEG BAHAD URJI TRUST, 37 SAKET COLONY, AGRA, WHICH HAVE BEEN DECIDED BY THE CIT(A) VIDE HIS AFORESAID APPELLATE ORDERS. HENCE, AFTER TAKING INTO ACCOUNT EQUAL PROPORTIONATE SHARES FROM THE TRUSTS, AS NARRATED BELOW, INCOME SO ARRIV ED IN THE SHARE OF THIS TRUSTEE IS ADDED IN HIS INCOME 3. WITH THESE BRIEF OBSERVATIONS, THE ASSESSING OFF ICER ADDED THE SHARES OF INCOME FROM THE SAID THREE TRUSTS, AT RS 1,13,000, RS 1,14 ,000 AND RS 1,07,500 RESPECTIVELY. TAKING THESE AMOUNTS INTO ACCOUNT, AS ALSO HIS INCO ME OF RS 1,49,350 DECLARED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSM ENT WAS NOW FRAMED AT RS 4,83,850. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BE FORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. LEARNED CIT(A) REJECTED THE GRIEVANCES OF THE ASSESSEE AND, INTER ALIA, OBSERVED AS FOLLOWS: ...........AS PER ORDER DATED 3.10.05 OF THE CIT( A) IN THE CASE OF THE TRUSTS, IT IS VERY CLEARLY HELD BY THE CIT(A) THAT THESE TRUSTS H AVE NOT COME INTO EXISTENCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 6 OF THE INDIAN TRUSTS ACT,1882. THE SOURCE OF ALL CAPITAL SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEET HAS NOT BEEN PRO PERLY EXAMINED. HE HAS ALSO HELD THAT THESE TRUSTS ARE NOT GENUINE. THEREF ORE, IN THE END OF THE ORDER, IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE CIT(A) THAT THE INCOME SHOWN I N THE HANDS OF THE TRUST HAS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE I N EQUAL PROPORTION. . .... THE ORDER OF THE AO UNDER APPEAL IS PASSED IN ACCORDANC E WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THE CIT(A)-I AGRA, IN HIS ORDER DATED 3.10.2005, AN D AGAINST THIS ORDER OF THE CIT(A), NO FINDINGS HAVE ARE GIVEN BY THE HONBLE I TAT AGRA....... ORDER PASSED BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 267/251 DATED 4.10.2006 DET ERMINING INCOME OF THE APPELLANT AT RS 4,83,850 IS CONFIRMED... 4. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED AND IS IN APPEAL BEFOR E US. 5. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, IT WA S NOTICED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER UNDER SECTION 267 R.W.S. 251, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2002-03, WAS PASSED ON 4 TH DECEMBER 2006 AND THAT, AS PRIMA FACIE APPEARS FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, THE ASSESSEE I.T.A. NO.: 278/AGRA/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 PAGE 3 OF 11 BEFORE US WAS NOT GIVEN ANY OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BY THE CIT(A) AT THE STAGE OF HOLDING THAT THE INCOME OF THE THREE TRUSTS NAMED EARLIER IN THI S ORDER WAS TO BE TAXED IN THE HANDS OF, AMONGST OTHERS, THIS ASSESSEE. IT IS IN THIS BACKDR OP THAT WE REQUIRED THE PARTIES TO ADDRESS ON THE LIMITED ASPECT WHETHER THE IMPUGNED ORDER CA N BE TREATED AS A VALID ORDER IN THE EYES OF THE LAW. WE HAVE HEARD LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES O N THIS ISSUE, INCLUDING RELATED ASPECT OF THE SCOPE OF SECTION 153(3), AT CONSIDERABLE LENGTH , AND WE PROPOSE TO DEAL WITH THIS ASPECT OF THE MATTER FIRST. LET US, THEREFORE, BEGUN BY TR YING TO APPRECIATE THE SCHEME OF THINGS SO FAR AS ASSESSMENTS AS A RESULT OF FINDINGS OR DIRE CTIONS IN THE APPELLATE ORDERS ARE CONCERNED. 6. SECTION 153 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PROVIDE S AS FOLLOWS: TIME-LIMIT FOR COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENTS AND REASSE SSMENTS. [(1) NO ORDER OF ASSESSMENT SHALL BE MADE UNDER SE CTION 143 OR SECTION 144 AT ANY TIME AFTER THE EXPIRY OF (A) TWO YEARS FROM THE END OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR I N WHICH THE INCOME WAS FIRST ASSESSABLE; OR (B) ONE YEAR FROM THE END OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH A RETURN OR A REVISED RETURN RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR COMMENCING ON THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 1988, OR ANY EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR, IS FILED UNDER SUB-SECTION (4) OR SUB-SECTION (5) OF S ECTION 139, WHICHEVER IS LATER :] [PROVIDED THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN WHIC H THE INCOME WAS FIRST ASSESSABLE IS THE ASSESSMENT YEAR COMMENCING [ON THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL , 2004 OR ANY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR], THE PROVISIONS OF CLAUSE (A) SHALL HAVE EFFE CT AS IF FOR THE WORDS 'TWO YEARS', THE WORDS 'TWENTY-ONE MONTHS' HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED : ] [PROVIDED FURTHER THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN WHICH THE INCOME WAS FIRST ASSESSABLE IS THE ASSESSMENT YEAR COMMENCING ON THE [1ST DAY OF A PRIL, 2005 OR ANY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR] AND DURING THE COURSE OF THE PROCEEDING FOR T HE ASSESSMENT OF TOTAL INCOME, A REFERENCE UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 92CA (I) WAS MADE BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2007 BUT A N ORDER UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) OF THAT SECTION HAS NOT BEEN MADE BEFORE SUCH DATE; OR (II) IS MADE ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2007, THE PROVISIONS OF CLAUSE (A) SHALL, NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE FIRST PROVISO, HAVE EFFECT AS IF FOR THE WORDS 'TWO YEARS', THE WORDS ' THIRTY-THREE MONTHS' HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED.] [PROVIDED ALSO THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN WHICH THE INCOME WAS FIRST ASSESSABLE IS THE ASSESSMENT YEAR COMMENCING ON THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2009 OR ANY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR AND DURING THE COURSE OF THE PROCEEDING FOR THE ASS ESSMENT OF TOTAL INCOME, A REFERENCE UNDER I.T.A. NO.: 278/AGRA/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 PAGE 4 OF 11 SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 92CA IS MADE, THE PROVIS IONS OF CLAUSE (A) SHALL, NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE FIRST PROVISO, HAVE EFFEC T AS IF FOR THE WORDS 'TWO YEARS', THE WORDS 'THREE YEARS' HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED.] [(1A) NO ORDER OF ASSESSMENT SHALL BE MADE UNDER S ECTION 115WE OR SECTION 115WF AT ANY TIME AFTER THE EXPIRY OF [TWENTY-ONE MONTHS] FROM THE EN D OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN WHICH THE FRINGE BENEFITS WERE FIRST ASSESSABLE. (1B) NO ORDER OF ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT SHALL B E MADE UNDER SECTION 115WG AFTER THE EXPIRY OF [NINE MONTHS] FROM THE END OF THE FINANCI AL YEAR IN WHICH THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 115WH WAS SERVED.] [(2) NO ORDER OF ASSESSMENT, REASSESSMENT OR RECOM PUTATION SHALL BE MADE UNDER SECTION 147 AFTER THE EXPIRY OF [ONE YEAR] FROM THE END OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 WAS SERVED: [PROVIDED THAT WHERE THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 WAS SERVED ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 1999, BUT BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2000, SUCH A SSESSMENT, REASSESSMENT OR RECOMPUTATION MAY BE MADE AT ANY TIME UP TO THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH , 2002:] [PROVIDED FURTHER THAT WHERE THE NOTICE UNDER SECT ION 148 WAS SERVED ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2005, [BUT BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2011 ] THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SUB-SECTION SHALL HAVE EFFECT AS IF FOR THE WORDS 'ONE YEAR', THE WORDS 'N INE MONTHS' HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED :] [PROVIDED ALSO THAT WHERE THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 WAS SERVED ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2006 [BUT BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2010] AND DURING THE COURSE OF THE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT OR RECOMPUTATION OF TOTA L INCOME, A REFERENCE UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 92CA (I) WAS MADE BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2007 BUT A N ORDER UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) OF THAT SECTION HAS NOT BEEN MADE BEFORE SUCH DATE; OR (II) IS MADE ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2007, THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SUB-SECTION SHALL, NOTWITHST ANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE SECOND PROVISO, HAVE EFFECT AS IF FOR THE WORDS 'ONE YEAR' , THE WORDS 'TWENTY-ONE MONTHS' HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED.] [PROVIDED ALSO THAT WHERE THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 WAS SERVED ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2010 AND DURING THE COURSE OF THE PROCEEDING FOR THE ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT OR RECOMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME, A REFERENCE UNDER SU B-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 92CA IS MADE, THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SUB-SECTION SHALL, NOTWITHSTANDI NG ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE SECOND PROVISO, HAVE EFFECT AS IF FOR THE WORDS 'ONE YEAR', THE WOR DS 'TWO YEARS' HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED.] [(2A) NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED [IN SUB-S ECTIONS (1), (1A), (1B) AND (2)], IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR COMMENCING ON THE 1ST DAY OF AP RIL, 1971, AND ANY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR, AN ORDER OF FRESH ASSESSMENT IN PURSUANCE OF AN ORDER UNDER SECTION 250, OR SECTION 254, OR SECTION 263 OR SECTION 264, SETTING ASIDE OR CANCEL LING AN ASSESSMENT, MAY BE MADE AT ANY TIME BEFORE THE EXPIRY OF ONE YEAR FROM THE END OF THE F INANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 250 OR SECTION 254 IS RECEIVED BY THE CHIEF COMMISS IONER OR COMMISSIONER OR, AS THE CASE MAY BE, THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 263 OR SECTION 264 IS P ASSED BY THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR COMMISSIONER: I.T.A. NO.: 278/AGRA/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 PAGE 5 OF 11 PROVIDED THAT WHERE THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 250 OR SECTION 254 IS RECEIVED BY THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR COMMISSIONER OR, AS THE CASE MAY BE , THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 263 OR SECTION 264 IS PASSED BY THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR COMMISSI ONER, ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 1999, BUT BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2000, SUCH AN ORDE R OF FRESH ASSESSMENT MAY BE MADE AT ANY TIME UP TO THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2002:] [PROVIDED FURTHER THAT WHERE THE ORDER UNDER SECTI ON 254 IS RECEIVED BY THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR COMMISSIONER OR, AS THE CASE MAY BE, THE ORDER U NDER SECTION 263 OR SECTION 264 IS PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2005 [BUT BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2011], THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SUB-SECTION SHALL HAVE EFFECT AS IF FOR THE WORDS 'ONE YEAR', THE WORDS 'NINE MONTHS' HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED :] [PROVIDED ALSO THAT WHERE THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 254 IS RECEIVED BY THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR COMMISSIONER OR, AS THE CASE MAY BE, THE ORDER UNDE R SECTION 263 OR SECTION 264 IS PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2006 [BUT BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2010], AND DURING THE COURSE OF THE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE FRESH ASSESSMENT OF TOTAL INCOME, A REFERENCE UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 92CA (I) WAS MADE BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2007 BUT A N ORDER UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 92CA HAS NOT BEEN MADE BEFORE SUCH DATE; OR (II) IS MADE ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2007, THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SUB-SECTION SHALL, NOTWITHST ANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE SECOND PROVISO, HAVE EFFECT AS IF FOR THE WORDS 'ONE YEAR' , THE WORDS 'TWENTY-ONE MONTHS' HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED.] [PROVIDED ALSO THAT WHERE THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 254 IS RECEIVED BY THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR COMMISSIONER OR, AS THE CASE MAY BE, THE ORDER UNDE R SECTION 263 OR SECTION 264 IS PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2010, AND DURING THE COURSE OF THE PROCEEDING FOR THE FRESH ASSESSMENT OF TOTAL INCOME, A REFEREN CE UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 92CA IS MADE, THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SUB-SECTION SHALL, NOT WITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE SECOND PROVISO, HAVE EFFECT AS IF FOR THE WORDS 'ONE YEAR' , THE WORDS 'TWO YEARS' HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED.] (3) THE PROVISIONS OF [SUB-SECTIONS (1), (1A), (1B) AND (2)] SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE FOLLOWING CLASSES OF ASSESSMENTS, REASSESSMENTS AND RECOMPUTATIONS WH ICH MAY, [SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (2A)] BE COMPLETED AT ANY TIME [(I) * * * *] (II) WHERE THE ASSESSMENT, REASSESSMENT OR RECOMPUT ATION IS MADE ON THE ASSESSEE OR ANY PERSON IN CONSEQUENCE OF OR TO GIVE EFFECT TO ANY F INDING OR DIRECTION CONTAINED IN AN ORDER, UNDER SECTIONS 250, 254, 260, 262, 263 OR 264 [OR I N AN ORDER OF ANY COURT IN A PROCEEDING OTHERWISE THAN BY WAY OF APPEAL OR REFERENCE UNDER THIS ACT]; (III) WHERE, IN THE CASE OF A FIRM, AN ASSESSMENT I S MADE ON A PARTNER OF THE FIRM IN CONSEQUENCE OF AN ASSESSMENT MADE ON THE FIRM UNDER SECTION 147 . [(4) NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE FOR EGOING PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION, SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 153A AND SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 153B, THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT, RELATING TO ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR, WHIC H STANDS REVIVED UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF I.T.A. NO.: 278/AGRA/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 PAGE 6 OF 11 SECTION 153A, SHALL BE MADE WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM TH E END OF THE MONTH OF SUCH REVIVAL OR WITHIN THE PERIOD SPECIFIED IN THIS SECTION OR SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 153B, WHICHEVER IS LATER.] [EXPLANATION 1 : IN COMPUTING THE PERIOD OF LIMITA TION FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION (I) THE TIME TAKEN IN REOPENING THE WHOLE OR ANY PA RT OF THE PROCEEDING OR IN GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO BE REHEARD UNDER THE PROVISO TO SECTION 129, OR (II) THE PERIOD DURING WHICH THE ASSESSMENT PROCEED ING IS STAYED BY AN ORDER OR INJUNCTION OF ANY COURT, OR [(IIA) THE PERIOD COMMENCING FROM THE DATE ON WHIC H THE ASSESSING OFFICER INTIMATES THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OR THE PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY, THE CONTRAV ENTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF CLAUSE (21) OR CLAUSE (22B) OR CLAUSE (23A) OR CLAUSE (23B) OR SUB -CLAUSE (IV) OR SUB-CLAUSE (V) OR SUB-CLAUSE (VI) OR SUB-CLAUSE (VIA) OF CLAUSE (23C) OF SECTION 10, UNDER CLAUSE (I) OF THE PROVISO TO SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 143 AND ENDING WITH THE DATE ON WHICH TH E COPY OF THE ORDER WITHDRAWING THE APPROVAL OR RESCINDING THE NOTIFICATION, AS THE CASE MAY BE, UNDER THOSE CLAUSES IS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER;] [(III) THE PERIOD COMMENCING FROM THE DATE ON WHIC H THE ASSESSING OFFICER DIRECTS THE ASSESSEE TO GET HIS ACCOUNTS AUDITED UNDER SUB-SECTION (2A) OF SECTION 142 AND (A) ENDING WITH THE LAST DATE ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO FURNISH A REPORT OF SUCH AUDIT UNDER THAT SUB-SECTION; OR (B) WHERE SUCH DIRECTION IS CHALLENGED BEFORE A COU RT, ENDING WITH THE DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER SETTING ASIDE SUCH DIRECTION IS RECEIVED BY THE COM MISSIONER, OR'] [(IV) * * * *] [(IVA) THE PERIOD (NOT EXCEEDING SIXTY DAYS) COMME NCING FROM THE DATE ON WHICH THE [ASSESSING OFFICER] RECEIVED THE DECLARATION UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 158A AND ENDING WITH THE DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) OF THAT SE CTION IS MADE BY HIM, OR] (V) IN A CASE WHERE AN APPLICATION MADE BEFORE THE INCOME-TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSION UNDER SECTION 245C IS REJECTED BY IT OR IS NOT ALLOWED TO BE PROCEEDED WITH BY IT, THE PERIOD COMMENCING FROM THE DATE ON WHICH SUCH APPLICATION IS MADE AND ENDING WITH THE DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 245D IS RECEIVED B Y THE COMMISSIONER UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF [THAT SECTION, OR] [(VI) THE PERIOD COMMENCING FROM THE DATE ON WHICH AN APPLICATION IS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTIO N 245Q AND ENDING WITH THE DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER REJECTING THE APPLICATION IS RECEIVED BY THE COMMISSIONER UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 245R, OR (VII) THE PERIOD COMMENCING FROM THE DATE ON WHICH AN APPLICATION IS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTIO N 245Q AND ENDING WITH THE DATE ON WHICH THE ADVANCE RULING PRONOUNCED BY IT IS RECEIVED BY THE COMMISSIONER UNDER SUB-SECTION (7) OF [SECTION 245R, OR]] [(VIII) THE PERIOD COMMENCING FROM THE DATE ON WHI CH A REFERENCE OR FIRST OF THE REFERENCES FOR EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION IS MADE BY AN AUTHORITY COM PETENT UNDER AN AGREEMENT REFERRED TO IN I.T.A. NO.: 278/AGRA/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 PAGE 7 OF 11 SECTION 90 OR SECTION 90A AND ENDING WITH THE DATE ON WHICH THE INFORMATION REQUESTED IS LAST RECEIVED BY THE COMMISSIONER OR A PERIOD OF ONE YEA R, WHICHEVER IS LESS,] OR; [(IX) THE PERIOD COMMENCING FROM THE DATE ON WHICH A REFERENCE FOR DECLARATION OF AN ARRANGEMENT TO BE AN IMPERMISSIBLE AVOIDANCE ARRANG EMENT IS RECEIVED BY THE COMMISSIONER UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 144BA AND ENDING O N THE DATE ON WHICH A DIRECTION UNDER SUB- SECTION (3) OR SUB-SECTION (6) OR AN ORDER UNDER SU B-SECTION (5) OF THE SAID SECTION IS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER.] (IX)[*****] [PROVIDED THAT WHERE IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE EXCLUSI ON OF THE AFORESAID TIME OR PERIOD, THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION REFERRED TO [IN SUB-SECTIONS (1), (1A ), (1B), [(2), (2A) AND (4)] AVAILABLE TO THE ASSES SING OFFICER FOR MAKING AN ORDER OF ASSESSMENT, REASSESS MENT OR RECOMPUTATION, AS THE CASE MAY BE, IS LESS THAN SIXTY DAYS, SUCH REMAINING PERIOD SHAL L BE EXTENDED TO SIXTY DAYS AND THE AFORESAID PERIOD OF LIMITATION SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE EXTENDED ACCORDINGLY:] [PROVIDED FURTHER THAT WHERE A PROCEEDING BEFORE T HE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION ABATES UNDER SECTION 245HA, THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION AVAILABLE U NDER THIS SECTION TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR MAKING AN ORDER OF ASSESSMENT, REASSESSMENT OR RE-C OMPUTATION, AS THE CASE MAY BE, SHALL, AFTER THE EXCLUSION OF THE PERIOD UNDER SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 245HA, BE NOT LESS THAN ONE YEAR; AND WHERE SUCH PERIOD OF LIMITATION IS LESS T HAN ONE YEAR, IT SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN EXTENDED TO ONE YEAR; AND FOR THE PURPOSES OF DETER MINING THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION UNDER SECTIONS 149, 153B, 154, 155, 158BE AND 231 AND FOR THE PURP OSES OF PAYMENT OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 243 OR SECTION 244 OR, AS THE CASE MAY BE, SECTION 244A, THIS PROVISO SHALL ALSO APPLY ACCORDINGLY.] EXPLANATION 2 : WHERE, BY AN ORDER [REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (II) OF SUB-SECTION (3)], ANY INCOME IS EXCLUDED FROM THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR AN ASSESSMENT YEAR, THEN, AN ASSESSMENT OF SUCH INCOME FOR ANOTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR SHALL, FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 150 AND THIS SECTION, BE DEEMED TO BE ONE MADE IN CONSEQUENCE OF OR TO GI VE EFFECT TO ANY FINDING OR DIRECTION CONTAINED IN THE SAID ORDER. EXPLANATION 3 : WHERE, BY AN ORDER [REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (II) OF SUB-SECTION (3)], ANY INCOME IS EXCLUDED FROM THE TOTAL INCOME OF ONE PERSON AND HE LD TO BE THE INCOME OF ANOTHER PERSON, THEN, AN ASSESSMENT OF SUCH INCOME ON SUCH OTHER PERSON S HALL, FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 150 AND THIS SECTION, BE DEEMED TO BE ONE MADE IN CONSEQUEN CE OF OR TO GIVE EFFECT TO ANY FINDING OR DIRECTION CONTAINED IN THE SAID ORDER, PROVIDED SUC H OTHER PERSON WAS GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BEFORE THE SAID ORDER WAS PASSED. 7. ONE COMMON THREAD, IRRESPECTIVE OF MANY AMENDMEN TS TO THIS SECTION, SO FAR AS TIME LIMITS SET OUT UNDER SECTION 153, FOR COMPLETI NG THE ASSESSMENTS, REASSESSMENTS AND RECOMPUTATIONS, ARE CONCERNED, IS THAT THESE TIME L IMITS DO NOT APPLY IN THE CASES WHERE THE ASSESSMENT, REASSESSMENT OR RECOMPUTATION IS MA DE ON THE ASSESSEE OR ANY PERSON IN CONSEQUENCE OF OR TO GIVE EFFECT TO ANY F INDING OR DIRECTION CONTAINED IN AN ORDER, UNDER SECTIONS 250, 254, 260, 262, 263 OR 26 4 OR IN AN ORDER OF ANY COURT IN A PROCEEDING OTHERWISE THAN BY WAY OF APPEAL OR REFER ENCE UNDER THIS ACT . THESE ARE I.T.A. NO.: 278/AGRA/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 PAGE 8 OF 11 THE CASES IN WHICH SUCH ASSESSMENTS, REASSESSMENTS AND RECOMPUTATIONS CAN BE DONE AT ANY TIME, SUBJECT ONLY TO THE CONDITION THAT THESE ASSESSMENTS, REASSESSMENTS AND RECOMPUTATIONS CAN BE DONE WITHIN THE END OF ONE YE AR FROM THE END OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH THE SAID ORDER, AS A CONSEQUENCE OF, OR TO GI VE EFFECT TO FINDINGS OR DIRECTIONS CONTAINED THEREIN, IS RECEIVED BY THE CHIEF COMMISS IONER OR COMMISSIONER CONCERNED OR. IN THE CASE OF THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 263 OR SECTION 264, THE ORDER IS PASSED. THERE ARE, HOWEVER, THREE IMPORTANT RIDERS TO THIS LEGAL POSIT ION. ONE OF THESE RIDERS, SET OUT IN EXPLANATION 3 TO SECTION 153(3)- AS SET OUT ABOVE, PROVIDES THAT, ANY INCOME IS EXCLUDED FROM THE TOTAL INCOME OF ONE PERSON AND HELD TO BE THE INCOME OF ANOTHER PERSON, THEN, AN ASSESSMENT OF SUCH INCOME ON SUCH OTHER PE RSON SHALL, FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 150 AND THIS SECTION, BE DEEMED TO BE ONE M ADE IN CONSEQUENCE OF OR TO GIVE EFFECT TO ANY FINDING OR DIRECTION CONTAINED IN THE SAID ORDER, PROVIDED SUCH OTHER PERSON WAS GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BEFO RE THE SAID ORDER WAS PASSED.. THE NET RESULT OF THIS ENABLING PROVISION, AND THE RIDER THERETO, IS THAT WHEN AS A RESULT OF A FINDING OR DIRECTION IN, INTER ALIA , IN AN APPELLATE ORDER, INCOME OF ONE PERSON (SAY X) IS HELD TO BE INCOME OF ANOTHER PERSON (SAY Y), THE ASSES SMENT OF SUCH ANOTHER PERSON (I.E. Y ) CAN BE ELIGIBLE FOR RELAXATION FROM TIME BARRING PR OVISIONS ONLY IF SUCH OTHER PERSON WAS GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BEFORE THE SAID ORDER (I.E. APPELLATE ORDER) WAS PASSED. 8. OF COURSE, IT IS NOT ON THE UNFETTERED DISCRETIO N OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY TO GIVE ANY DIRECTIONS AND THERE ARE STRICT LEGAL PROVISIONS ON THE SCOPE OF WHAT DIRECTIONS OR FINDINGS CAN BE GIVEN IN THE COURSE OF THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS . HONBLE SUPREME COURT, IN THE CASE OF RAJINDER NATH VS CIT (120 ITR 14), HAS HELD THAT A FINDING GIVEN IN AN APPEAL, REVISION OR REFERENCE ARISING OUT OF AN ASSESSMENT MUST BE A FINDING NECESSARY FOR THE DISPOSAL OF THE PARTICULAR CASE, THAT IS TO SAY, IN RESPECT OF THE PARTICULAR ASSESSEE AND IN RELATION TO THE PARTICULAR ASSESSMENT YEAR. TO B E A NECESSARY FINDING, IT MUST BE DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE DISPOSAL OF THE CASE . HOWEVER, THAT ASPECT OF THE MATTER IS ACADEMIC SINCE SECTION 267 SPECIFICALLY PROVIDES TH AT, WHERE AS A RESULT OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 246 OR SECTION 246A OR SECTION 253, A NY CHANGE IS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT OF A BODY OF INDIVIDUALS OR AN ASSOCIATI ON OF PERSONS OR A NEW ASSESSMENT OF A BODY OF INDIVIDUALS OR AN ASSOCIATI ON OF PERSONS IS ORDERED TO BE MADE, COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) OR THE APPELLATE TRI BUNAL, AS THE CASE MAY BE, SHALL PASS AN ORDER AUTHORISING THE ASSESSING OFFICER EIT HER TO AMEND THE ASSESSMENT MADE ON ANY MEMBER OF THE BODY OR ASSOCIATION OR MA KE A FRESH ASSESSMENT ON ANY I.T.A. NO.: 278/AGRA/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 PAGE 9 OF 11 MEMBER OF THE BODY OR ASSOCIATION . IN OTHER WORDS, THE CIT(A), AS ALSO THIS TRIBUN AL, DOES INDEED HAVE THE POWERS TO ISSUE SUCH DIRECTION S. THE POWERS TO GIVE SUCH DIRECTIONS IS ONE THING, BUT RELAXATION IN TIME LIMIT FOR COMPLET ION OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 153(3) IS QUITE ANOTHER THING. THAT RELAXATION UNDER SECTION 153(3), AS EVIDENT FROM EXPLANATION 3 TO SECTION 153(3), CAN ONLY COME INTO PLAY WHEN THE PE RSON IN WHOSE HANDS INCOME IS TO BE ADDED, AS A RESULT OF THESE FINDINGS OR DIRECTIONS, WAS GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BEFORE THE SAID ORDER (I.E. APPELLATE ORDER) WAS PASSED . 9. WHEN OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE LEGAL POSITION, AS SET OUT ABOVE, WAS PUT TO THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, HE SUBMITTED T HAT AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING HAVING BEEN GRANTED TO THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE TRUSTS I N QUESTION, AS WAS ADMITTEDLY GIVEN BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND IN VIEW OF THE POSITION THAT NO TRUSTS EXISTED IN THE EYES OF THE LAW, IS REQUIRED TO BE TREATED AS HEARING TO THE REPRESENTA TIVES OF THE TRUSTEES. ON THE BASIS OF THIS REASONING, ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL RE PRESENTATIVE, CONDITIONS SET OUT IN EXPLANATION 3 TO SECTION 153(3) WERE SATISFIED AND THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AS A RESULT OF THE FINDINGS IN THE COURSE OF THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS OF THE TRUSTS, IS A LEGALLY VALID ORDER PASSED WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT SET OUT IN SECTION 153(2A). LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE POWERS OF THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) ARE CO TERMINUS WITH THE POWERS OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER, AND, THEREFORE, WHATEVER ASSESSING OFFICER CAN DO, THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS ) CAN DO AS WELL. WE ARE UNABLE TO UPHOLD THE STAND SO TAKEN BY THE LEARNED DEPARTMENT AL REPRESENTATIVE. SO FAR AS THE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE IN WHOSE HAN DS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IN APPEAL IS TO BE ADDED, IS CONCERNED, IT IS CONDITION PRECEDE NT FOR GIVING ANY FINDING ADVERSE TO SUCH ASSESSEE VIS--VIS THE TIME LIMITS FOR COMPLETION O F HIS ASSESSMENT, REASSESSMENT OR RECOMPUTATIONS ARE CONCERNED. THAT IS, IN OUR CONSI DERED VIEW, UNAMBIGUOUS SCHEME OF EXPLANATION 3 TO SECTION 153(3). WHEN AN APPELLATE AUTHORITY DOES NOT DO SO, THE AFFECTED ASSESSEE CAN NOT BE PUT TO ANY DISADVANTAGE AS FAR AS THE STATUTORY TIME LIMITS FOR COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENTS, REASSESSMENT OR RECOMPUT ATIONS. AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE SO GIVEN SHOULD BE A SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITY AND THE AFFECTED A SSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO BE PUT TO NOTICE ON THAT ISSUE. A GENERAL HEARING GIVEN TO THE REPRESE NTATIVE OF THE TRUSTS IN QUESTION CANNOT, IN OUR HUMBLE UNDERSTANDING, BE EQUATED WITH SUCH SPEC IFIC OPPORTUNITY TO THE AFFECTED ASSESSEE AND THE AFFECTED ASSESSEE BEING PUT TO NOT ICE ABOUT THE CONCLUSIONS ADVERSELY AFFECTING HIM. AS FOR THE POWERS OF THE LEARNED CO MMISSIONER (APPEALS) BEING CO TERMINUS WITH THE POWERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THIS PROP OSITION HOLDS GOOD ONLY VIS--VIS THE ASSESSEE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) AND OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD NOT I.T.A. NO.: 278/AGRA/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 PAGE 10 OF 11 EXTEND TO ALL THE ASSESSEE ON WHOM THE ASSESSING OF FICER MAY HAVE JURISDICTION. AS REGARDS THE TIME LIMIT UNDER SECTION 153(2A), THIS COMES IN TO PLAY WHEN FRESH ASSESSMENT FOR THE SAME ASSESSEE AND THE SAME ASSESSMENT YEAR IS TO BE MADE AND ALL OTHER FRESH ASSESSMENTS AS A RESULT OF THE APPELLATE ORDER, INC LUDING A FRESH ASSESSMENT IN THE CASE OF THAT VERY ASSESSEE FOR ANOTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR, BY THE VIRTUE OF DEEMING FICTIONS SET OUT IN EXPLANATION 2 AND 3, ARE TO BE TREATED AS DEEMED TO BE THE ASSESSMENTS MADE IN CONSEQUENCE OF OR TO GIVE EFFECT TO ANY FINDING OR DIRECTION CONTAINED IN THE SAID ORDER. IN VIEW OF THESE DISCUSSIONS, AS ALSO BEARING IN MIND ENTIRETY OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT UNLESS THIS ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN A SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, BEFORE THE APPELLATE ORDER IN THE CASES OF GURUNANA KDEVJI TRUST, GURU GOVIND SINGHJI TRUST AND GURU TEG BAHADURJI TRUST WAS PASSED OR UNLESS T HE IMPUGNED ORDER WAS PASSED WITHIN THE TIME LIMITS SET OUT UNDER SECTION 153(1) OR (2) , THE IMPUGNED ORDER CANNOT BE SAID TO BE SUSTAINABLE IN LAW. THE TIME LIMIT UNDER SECTION 1 53(1) AND (2) ARE CLEARLY NOT SATISFIED ON THE FACTS OF THIS CASE SINCE IT IS NOT A CASE OF SE RVING THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148, THE ASSESSMENT YEAR BEFORE US IS 2002-03, A VALID RETUR N WAS DULY FILED AND PROCESSED, AND YET THE IMPUGNED ORDER WAS PASSED ON 4 TH DECEMBER 2006 ( I.E. WELL AFTER TWO YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR). THE SCHEME OF THE INCOME TAX ACT FIERCELY GUARDS THE RULE OF FINALITY TO INCOME TAX PROCEEDINGS, WHETHER IN ASSESSMENT, REASSESSMENT, REVISIONS, RECTIFICATIONS OR ANY OTHER PROCEEDINGS, AND ONCE T HE TIME LIMIT FOR THAT COURSE OF ACTION IS OVER, THE FINALITY THERETO CANNOT BE DISTURBED EXCE PT UNDER THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. THE ONLY THING WHICH CAN HELP THE CAUSE OF THE REVE NUE IS THUS A SPECIFIC NOTICE OF HEARING HAVING BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US, AS MAN DATED BY EXPLANATION 3 TO SECTION 153(3). IT IS ONLY WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER CAN D EMONSTRATE THAT THIS ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN A SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING, BEFORE THE APPEL LATE ORDER DATED 3.10.2005 WAS PASSED IN THE CASES OF GURUNANAKDEVJI TRUST, GURU GOVIND SING HJI TRUST AND GURU TEG BAHADURJI TRUST, THAT THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER CAN BE TR EATED AS LEGALLY VALID. 10. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS AND BEARING IN MIND ENTIRETY OF THE CASE, WE DEEM IT AND FIT AND PROPER TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR LIMITED VERIFICATION OF THIS ASPECT OF THE MATTER. ON THE F ACE OF IT, AS EVIDENT FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, NO SUCH OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESS EE BEFORE US. HOWEVER, AS A MEASURE OF ABUNDANT CAUTION, WE ARE REMITTING VERIFICATION OF THIS FACTUAL ASPECT TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN CASE IT IS FOUND THIS ASSESSE E HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN ANY SUCH SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING, THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORD ER SHALL STAND QUASHED AND THE MATTER I.T.A. NO.: 278/AGRA/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 PAGE 11 OF 11 RESTS THERE. IN THE EVENT, HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING O FFICER CAN DEMONSTRATE THE FULFILMENT OF THIS CONDITION, THE JURISDICTION CAN BE SAID TO HAV E BEEN ASSUMED LEGALLY BUT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL STILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS BY WAY OF A SPEAKING ORDER AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW, RATH ER THAN PROCEEDING TO ADD THE ASSESSEEES SHARE IN TRUST INCOME STRAIGHT AWAY WIT HOUT ADJUDICATING UPON SUCH LEGAL OBJECTIONS, AS HAVE BEEN TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE, ON MERITS OF HIS CASE. WHATEVER DIRECTIONS THE CIT(A) MAY HAVE GIVEN IN THE COURSE OF THE APPE LLATE PROCEEDINGS ON THESE TRUSTS, THESE FINDINGS OR DIRECTIONS CAN AT BEST BE A STARTING PO INT FOR EXAMINING THE TAXABILITY IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND CAN ENABLE THE ASSESSING OFFICE R, THOUGH SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS DISCUSSED ABOVE, TO INITIATE THAT PROCESS, BUT THES E FINDINGS OR DIRECTIONS CANNOT PRECLUDE THE ASSESSEE FROM RAISING SUCH LEGAL PLEAS, AS HE DEEMS APPROPRIATE, IN THE COURSE OF HIS ASSESSMENT. THESE OBSERVATIONS DONOT BIND THE ASSES SEE ON MERITS AND ALL SUCH LEGAL ARGUMENTS, AS THIS ASSESSEE MAY TAKE, ARE TO BE ANY WAY EXAMINED ON MERITS. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS, THE MATTER STANDS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIS TICAL PURPOSES IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. IT IS SO PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IMMEDI ATELY UPON CONCLUSION OF HEARING TODAY ON 4 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2014. SD/- SD/- JOGINDER SINGH PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AGRA, THE 4 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2014. COPIES TO : (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ETC SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA