NASIM SIKANDAR, J.---This is a case stated by the Lahore Banch of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of Commissioner of Income-tax, Zone-A, Lahore. The following questions have been framed for our consideration and reply:--- "(1) Whether the bar created by subsection (5) of section 5 of the Income Tax Ordinance in regard to challenging the jurisdiction of an I.T.O. Is also applicable before the Appellate Authorities.
(2) Whether by filing a return the assessee is debarred to challenge the jurisdiction of I.T.O. Before the Appellate Authorities where admittedly the I.T.O. Who makes the assessment has no jurisdiction to assess,"
2. According to the statement of the case, the assessee was residing and also doing business inside Delhi Gate, Lahore. He was earlier assessed at Circle. P. However, the assessment in question was completed in Circle-R after the assessee filed a return in compliance with the notice issued by the I.T.O. Of that Circle. On challenge the objection against the jurisdiction was rejected by the First Appellate Authority. The learned Tribunal, however, concluded that subsection (5) of section 5 had to be read together with subsections (3) and (4). In their way of interpretation, the bar to raise an objection to jurisdiction as contemplated in these provisions was relevant only before the Commissioner, Regional Commissioner or C.B.R. Also that mere factum of having responded to a notice issued by the Assessing Officer an assessee was not debarred from challenging jurisdiction.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the Revenue, we are not inclined to answer any of the aforesaid two questions. It has been noted that the learned Tribunal in the order recorded on appeal of the assessee on 9-12-1984 found it as a fact that I.T.O. Circle-R had no jurisdiction to make the assessm ent. In the statement of the case again they have stated that admittedly the I.T.O. Circle-R had no jurisdiction to make an assessment. In the presence of such findings of fact which are otherwise not controverted by the Revenue, we are of the view that both the questions remain only of an academic interest. If the Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to frame an assessm ent and as per the order of the learned Tribunal the Revenue had so admitted, no question of law can be said to have arisen out of its order. This Court while exercising jurisdiction under section 136(5) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 does not express an opinion on matters of academic interest only.
Answer declined. Answer declined.