MIAN SAQIB. NISAR, j:--Admittedly, the order of the Income Tax Tribunal was not served upon the s assessee/tax payer till 11.4.2004, because the previous service was effected upon the A.R: of the taxpayer, which, is not in accordance with the law. The tax-payer/assessee, for the first time, upon his application, obtained the certified copy of the order on 11.4.2004 and filed ah application under Section 136(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 before the Tribunal for the reference of the question of law to this Court, however, the application should have been under Section 133(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, because by that time the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 had come into force.' Be that as it may, the application has been declined by the Tribunal on the ground that the same is barred by 221 days-.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant states that the time shall be computed from 11.4.2004 when the c6py of the order was received by the assessee/tax-payer; the application for reference has been filed on 11.5.2004, which is within the period of 90 days, as prescribed, therefore, the view taken by the Tribunal about the limitation is illegal and erroneous.
Time would commence from that date and, therefore, the application for reference filed on 11.5.2004 by the applicant before the ITAT was within the prescribed period of limitation.
In the light of above, considering this reference under Section 133(7) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is sent back to the Tribunal for decision afresh upon the application of the applicant, which should be deemed to be under the provision of Section 133(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001.