Limitation objections not raised below may be left unanswered on appeal, with the challenge rejected.

A court may decline to answer a referred limitation question on merits where the decisive contention was not raised or examined before the Tribunal or the High Court. Here, the challenge concerned whether reassessment proceedings initiated under section 34(1)(a) after an appellate direction were barred by the period in section 34(3), but that objection had not been argued below. The Court therefore gave no substantive ruling on the limitation issue and rejected the appeal, leaving the departmental action undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal could succeed when the decisive plea that assessment proceedings were barred by limitation under section 34(3) had not been raised before the Tribunal or the High Court.

Analysis: The reference and the appeal turned on a limitation objection to reassessment proceedings initiated under section 34(1)(a) pursuant to an appellate direction. The Court noted that the broader question whether the assessment could be completed outside the period prescribed by section 34(3) had not been argued or raised before the Tribunal or the High Court. In these circumstances, the Court declined to pronounce on the referred question on merits.

Conclusion: The Court did not record an answer to the referred question and rejected the appellant's challenge.

Final Conclusion: The dismissal left undisturbed the departmental action and no adjudication was made on the underlying limitation issue.

Ratio Decidendi: A court may decline to answer a question on merits where the decisive contention was not raised and examined in the proceedings below.

---