ITA 3/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. BARUAH (Amitava Roy, J) Heard Mr. U. Bhuyan, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant-Revenue and Mr. U.K. Barthakur, learned counsel for the respondent-Assessee. The appellant-Revenue’s pleaded case, is that the respondent-Assessee had been a ssessed as an individual for the assessment year 1992-1993 on the basis of a ret urn filed by him as well as his income from the LOC Scam and an order to that effect was passed on 28.03.2003 u/s.143(3)/147 (Income Tax Act) (hereinafter for short referred to as the Act). Being aggrieved, the respondent-Assessee preferred an appeal before the Commiss ioner, Income Tax (Appeals)(hereinafter for short referred to as the CIT (A). B y order dated 04.12.2006, the appeal was rejected and the assessment was confirm ed. The respondent-Assessee, therefore, took the matter before the Income Tax A ppellate Tribunal Gauhati Bench, Guwahati (hereinafter for short referred to as the Tribunal), which was registered as ITA No.53(Gau)/2007. By order dated 12. 03.2008 impugned herein, the learned Tribunal interfered with the order of the C IT(A) and restored the matter to the file of the Assessment Officer with the dir ection to him to reexamine the issue in the light of the decision of the crimina l Court before which the LOC cases filed by the CBI were pending trial. The lea rned Tribunal further directed the Assessment Officer to provide reasonable oppo rtunity of hearing to the respondent-Assessee. It however, provided a rider tha t in case the decision of the criminal Court in the LOC cases was not forthcomin g within the period of limitation prescribed for making the assessment, the Asse ssing Officer would pass appropriate order(s) before the expiry thereof. Being aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal and this Court has formulated the following question of law to be answered- Whether in a case of re-assessment u/s147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 where the foundation of the belief that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessme nt is the charge sheet filed against the assessee in a criminal Court, the incom e tax authorities should await the verdict of the criminal Court or make the ass essment independent of the outcome of the criminal trial? In course of the arguments, it is submitted at the Bar that meanwhile a fresh as sessment for the year aforementioned assessment year has been made by the Assess ing Officer in terms of the order dated 12.03.2008 of the learned Tribunal and i mpugned herein and that the said assessment is under challenge before the approp riate forum by the respondent-Assessee. In the above view of the matter, we are of the unhesitant opinion that having re gard to the development that had occurred meanwhile, the question of law formula ted in the instant appeal does not warrant any decision on merit. The assessmen t having been made and under scrutiny on merits before the appropriate forum pre scribed by law, the logic or reasoning forming the foundation of the impugned or der dated 12.03.2008, in the facts and circumstances attendant on the present ap peal has lost its significance. This appeal is thus closed. Without offering any comment on the merit of the challenge made herein, the resp ondent-Assessee would be entitled under law to pursue his relief/remedy under th e Act against the assessment made in terms of the order dated 12.03.2008 of the learned Tribunal. No costs.