- (1.) Heard Sri Ghan Shyam Chaudhary, learned counsel for appellant and Sri Pradeep Agrawal, counsel appearing on behalf of respondent.
(2.) This is an appeal preferred by Revenue aggrieved by judgment and order dated 31.08.2016 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow Bench 'B' (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal") in Income Tax Appeal no. 384/Lkw/2016. Respondent-Assessee is represented through counsel hence, no notice need be issued and we proceed to hear the matter finally at this stage.
(3.) Learned counsel for Revenue has sought to argue that there are three following substantial questions of law involved in this appeal:- "1. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 31.08.2016 has erred in law and on facts by upholding the applicability of Section 153 (2A) for ascertaining the limitation period for the consequential order passed by the Assessing Officer, when the Ld. ITAT by its earlier order dated 18.11.2011 had set-aside the appellate order of the CIT(A) and not the order of assessment completed by the Assessing Officer. 2. When under the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had erred in law by not adjudicating upon the applicability of Section 153(3) of the Act to the consequential order dated 26.03.2014 passed by the Assessing Officer on the directions given by Ld. ITAT's earlier order dated 18.11.2011 to consider additional evidences filed before the CIT(A). 3. When under the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in applying section 153(2A) by ignoring that the earlier assessment order was not set aside by the ITAT itself and the limitation provided u/s 153(2A) will not applicable.";