ITA No.124/2009 14/10/2014. Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for appellant. Shri Mukesh Agrawal, learned counsel for respondents. They are heard on I.A. No.1667/2014 application filed for condoning delay of 27 days in filing of this appeal.Keeping in view reasons indicated in application, same is allowed. Delay in filing of appeal is condoned. Learned counsel for parties are heard on question of admission of this appeal.During course of hearing of appeal, learned counsel for appellant argued that substantial question of law framed as question No.1 in page 7 of memorandum of appeal only, arises for consideration in this appeal.The respondent assessee was working in Municipal Corporation, Bhopal as Public Relation Officer and was deriving income from salary. Economic Offences Wing of State Government conducted search operation in his residence and office and certain cash and ornaments were received.Based on same, proceedings under Section 148 were initiated against him for assessment year 2001-2002 and 2002-2003and thereafter,the orders of 2 ITA No.124/2009 assessment were passed.However, subsequently thereof, on account of there being some income which is said to have escaped assessment, it seems that notice was issued for re-opening of assessment under Section 143(3). Subsequently, assessments were also made.On appeals being filed before Commissioner, Appeal and Tribunal, even though Appellate Authorities found that there is delay in initiating proceedings under Section 143(3), but authorities went into merits of matter and interfered into assessment made by holding that certain amount has been added which is not permissible. Challenging concurrent orders passed by Appellate Authorities, this appeal has been filed and as indicated herein above only substantial question is with regard to question of delay in issuing notice under Section 143(3). It is argued by learned counsel that limitation has to be reckoned from date of issuance of notice under Section 148 i.e. 1.11.2004 and not with effect from date when assessment was completed under Section 143(3). Be it as it may be, on going through order passed by Appellate Tribunal Annexure A/3 we find that after taking note of aforesaid aspect of matter, Appellate Tribunal has 3 ITA No.124/2009gone into merits of matter and from para 6 onwards after discussing issue on merit has found that learned Appellate Commissioner has not committed any error in interfering with order of assessment and deleting certain additions made by Assessing Officer to tune of Rs.1,05,456/- for assessment year 2001-2002and Rs.1,01,648/- for assessment year 2002-2003.That being so, even if question of law framed arises for consideration in matter, fact remains that ignoring question of limitation, learned Tribunal has gone into merits of matter and interfered with order of assessment and nothing is brought on record to hold that this finding recorded on merit is unsustainable. That being so, we see no reason to interfere as no prejudice is caused to Revenue as on merit,also Appellate Authorities have found that Assessment Order to be unsustainable. Accordingly, finding no ground,this appeal is dismissed.(Rajendra Menon) (Sanjay Yadav) Judge Judge mrs. mishra Commissioner of Income-tax v. Mohd. Hameed Khan