- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dt. 6th May, 2002, passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the petition has been dismissed.
(2.) THE grievance which was raised by the petitioner before the learned Single Judge was that the petitioner had objected to the notices issued by the ITO on the ground that the same were time -barred but this objection was not being decided by the ITO. The learned Single Judge has observed in the end of the order that the ITO is expected to decide the representation so submitted by the petitioner as early as possible and petitioner is also given liberty to raise all objections which are raised here in the writ petition before the ITO and ITO is expected to decide the objections as early as possible but not later than two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order passed by the learned Single Judge. We convert this expectation of the learned Single Judge as a direction by this Court to the ITO. Learned counsel for the appellant has pointed out that the ITO has passed the order on 22nd July, 2001, without deciding his representation. We, therefore, also make it clear that unless the petitioner's objections are decided by a speaking order, there is no question of passing the final order in the matter of assessment on 22nd July, 2002. The ITO, shall first decide the objections/representation of the petitioner with regard to the notice being time -barred and would thereafter pass the assessment order if necessary. This appeal is hereby disposed of in terms as aforesaid.;