ORDER All these appeals arise out of a common order, dated 4.3.2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the "Tribunal"). 2. The admitted fact is that the petitioner, as assessee under the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") had filed his voluntary return for assessment years 1987-88 to 1991-92 under Section 139 of the Act which were also accepted in toto and/or by way of enhancement of taxable income which in course of scrutiny in terms of Section 143(3) of the Act were also accepted with or even without some enhancement by the Assessing Officer. 3. It however appears that subsequently the Assessing Officer upon receipt of certain information with regard to the concealment of income tax by the appellant, from the records of a criminal case lodged by the Central Bureau of Investigation being RC-55(A) of 1996 pertaining to surreptitious business dealings of the petitioner, in exercise of power under Section 147 of the Act, had passed an order that certain income chargeable for the purpose of computing and determining tax had escaped assessment and as such the appellant should submit fresh return. In pursuance of the said order under Section 147 of the Act which was passed on 11.3.1998 by the Assessing Officer, a notice in terms of Section 148 of the Act had also been issued to the appellant whereafter the appellant had appeared and had also made a request for supply of the reasons recorded in the order in terms of Section 147 of the Act. At the same time, the appellant in his communication, dated 20.8.1999 had also stated that his original return at the time of making his voluntary disclosure should be treated to be the return even for the purpose of Section 147 of the Act. It appears that after the appellant was supplied the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, dated 11.3.1998, he had also submitted his certain explanations as and when called for by the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer ultimately had passed the order of assessment in terms of Section 147 of the Act holding that a huge amount of income tax payable by the appellant had escaped assessment and accordingly, fresh order of assessment had been passed after taking into consideration the amount which has escaped assessment in the earlier proceeding under Section 143(3) of the Act. 4. 4. At this stage, from the order of the Assessing Officer passed on 31.3.2000 for different financial years needs to be noticed in a tabular form. SI. No. Financial year Taxable income Taxable income Taxable income declared by the enhanced in cou- of reassessment petitioner in the rse of scrutiny under Section voluntary return (in Rupees) 147 of the Act (in Rupees) (in Rupees) 1. 1987-88 80,647.00 80,647.00 8,25,050.00 2. 1988-89 1,80,120.00 1,80,120.00 19,21,060.00 3. 1989-90 1,71,960.00 2,15,027.00 20,44,880.00 4. 1990-91 1,43,940.00 1,43,950.00 7,92,240.00 5. 1991-92 96,012.00 96,012.00 6,50,143.00 5. The appellant as against the aforementioned revised assessment order in terms of Section 147 of the Act had filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and all these appeals were allowed by a common order, dated 1.2.2001 on the point of jurisdiction alone holding that the proceeding initiated against the appellant under Section 147 of the Act was itself not sustainable either on facts on in law. 6. The Revenue as against the aforementioned separate appellate order had filed appeal before the Tribunal. It may be however significant, to note hare that the petitioner also moved in appeal against that part of the appellate order passed by the Tribunal and had assailed the assessment order of the Assessing Officer on merit as well as limitation etc. The two members of the Tribunal in the appeal filed by the Revenue had differed in their conclusion and while the Accounting Member had dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, the Judicial Member of the Tribunal had allowed the appeal of the Revenue by their separate orders, dated 20.3.2002. There being a difference of opinion between the members of the Tribunal, the matter was placed before the Vice-President, who acting as a third member had agreed with the order of the Judicial Member of the Tribunal holding that the reopening of the assessment for respective assessment years in terms of Section 147 of the Act had been voluntarily initiated. Consequently, the appeal of the Revenue in terms of the majority view was allowed. It may be noted here that the cross appeal of the appellant was dismissed meaning thereby the assessment order of the Assessing Officer, dated 31.3.2000 was upheld by an order of the Tribunal, dated 4.3.2004. 7. All these appeals, thereafter, were filed by the appellant before this Court as against the appellant order of the Tribunal. 8. It may be noted here that the cross appeal of the appellant was dismissed meaning thereby the assessment order of the Assessing Officer, dated 31.3.2000 was upheld by an order of the Tribunal, dated 4.3.2004. 7. All these appeals, thereafter, were filed by the appellant before this Court as against the appellant order of the Tribunal. 8. It is common ground that subsequent to the order passed by the Tribunal, the appellant had assailed the order of the Assessing Officer on merit before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as also the Tribunal and the same had now been disposed of during the pendency of these appeals. 9. Dr. K.N. Singh appearing on behalf of the appellant states that the appellant, the assessee, intends to prefer appeal against those orders affirming the assessment order under Section 147 of the Act on merit. He, however, contends that in view of the fact that the whole proceeding initiated under Section 147 of the Act was itself without jurisdiction inasmuch as there was no reasons to believe as also the proceeding initiated under Section 147 of the Act was barred by limitation in terms of Section 149 of the Act, this Court should decide these appeal. He further submits that in case these appeals are allowed, the assessment order and the order in appeal on merit passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as also the Tribunal on merit would not be required to filed/ pressed. 10. We are of the opinion that once the appellant had undergone the statutory remedy and now the order on merit in assessment in terms of Section 147 of the Act has been passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as by the Tribunal, it would not be prudent on our part to decide the questions raised in these appeals which in our view has become infructuous on account of subsequent events. We are further of the opinion that the facts which are required to be examined even for the disposal of these appeals will have to be necessarily looked into and examined in the appeals that is proposed to be filed by the appellant against the orders passed by the Tribunal upholding the order of assessment under Section 147 of the Act on merit. We must not loose sight of the fact that only two points raised in these set of appeals as with regard to jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to invoke the power under Section 147 of the Act either on the ground of their being no merit for constituting the ingredients of reasons to believe that certain income had escaped attention of the Assessing Authority or that the initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Act for the respective years was barred by limitation are essentially questions of fact which will have to be looked into by this Court in the proposed appeals. At this stage, one can only take note of the provisions made in Section 292(B) of the Act which gives certain immunity and sanctity to the proceeding undertaken by the Authorities under the Act. 11. In that view of the matter, we deem it inexpedient to go into the legality of the orders impugned in these appeals. We would further give liberty to the appellant to raise the points which have been raised in the present set of appeals in the appeals which is intended to be filed by the appellant against the final appellate order passed by the Tribunal against the order of assessment under Section 147 of the Act. 12. These appeals are accordingly disposed of with the aforementioned observations.