Court dismisses challenge to timeliness of assessment order, as Tribunal already set aside for fresh assessment.

The court dismissed the petitioner's application challenging the timeliness of the original assessment order dated April 21, 1979, for the assessment year 1976-77. The court held that as the Tribunal had already set aside the assessment order for a fresh assessment, challenging its timeliness was effectively contesting the Tribunal's decision. Since the petitioner did not challenge the Tribunal's decision, the court found no merit in the application and ruled that the Tribunal should not be directed to refer any question of law.

---

---

Issues:
1. Validity of assessment order dated March 5, 1983, in relation to time-barred order dated March 29, 1979.
2. Legality of treating a draft assessment order as final under the Income-tax Act.
3. Justification of Income-tax Officer in following proceedings based on an illegal and void order.
4. Legality of addition made in the trading account on a cash accounting basis.
5. Legality of initiating proceedings based on time-barred and invalid orders.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought reference of five questions of law before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the assessment year 1976-77. The Tribunal dismissed the application, stating that no question of law arose. The petitioner then filed a petition raising three questions, including the legality and timeliness of assessment orders made under the Income-tax Act. However, the court pointed out that the petitioner could only raise questions sought in the original reference application. The court emphasized that the assessment order dated April 21, 1979, was already subject to appeal and remand by the Tribunal, making the issue of timeliness not a valid ground for challenge. The court held that seeking to challenge the original assessment order's timeliness was effectively challenging the Tribunal's decision to set it aside and remand for a fresh assessment. As the petitioner did not seek reference against the Tribunal's decision, the court dismissed the application, stating that the Tribunal should not be directed to refer any question of law.

In summary, the court found no merit in the petitioner's contention regarding the timeliness of the original assessment order. The court clarified that the issue had already been addressed through the Tribunal's decision to set aside the assessment order and order a fresh assessment. As the petitioner did not challenge the Tribunal's decision, the court dismissed the application, emphasizing that the Tribunal should not be directed to refer any question of law.

---