JUDGMENT Yashwant Varma, J. -- This revision is directed against an order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal dated 19 October 2010. The sole question, which falls for consideration, is whether the subsequent assessment as carried out by the Assessing Authority would be hit by the provisions of Section 21(5) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 [1948 Act]. 2. The undisputed facts appear to be that an ex parte order of assessment came to be made on 21 February 2002 against the revisionist. The application under Section 30 of the 1948 Act for setting aside the ex parte order was rejected. The revisionist preferred two appeals challenging both the orders of assessment on merits as also the order by which the application under Section 30 came to be dismissed. The first appellate authority allowed these appeals on 14 August 2002. It is the case of the revisionist that the order dated 14 August 2002 was served upon the assessing authority on 21 August 2002. Learned counsel for the revisionist has in this connection also referred to the response date 8 November 2010 stated to have been furnished pursuant to an application made under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005. Upon the application under Section 30 being allowed by the Tribunal and on the matter being remanded the assessing authority proceeded to pass an order of assessment on 3 July 2003. It is this order of assessment which is stated to have been made in violation of the mandatory time period prescribed under sub section (5) of Section 21. The Tribunal has proceeded to dismiss the appeal holding that the issue of the assessing authority having stood denuded of jurisdiction upon the expiry of six months from the date of service of the order was not taken or urged before him. It accordingly refused to accept the challenge laid by the revisionist. It is this order which has been impugned in the instant revision. 3. The issue of limitation/time period within which an order of assessment or reassessment can be made pursuant to an order of assessment having been set aside under Section 30 is no longer res integra and stands duly considered by the Full Bench of this Court in M/s. Minakshi Udyog, Agra v. Commissioner of Trade Tax 2005 UPTC 143. 3. The issue of limitation/time period within which an order of assessment or reassessment can be made pursuant to an order of assessment having been set aside under Section 30 is no longer res integra and stands duly considered by the Full Bench of this Court in M/s. Minakshi Udyog, Agra v. Commissioner of Trade Tax 2005 UPTC 143. The Full Bench has proceeded to hold that where orders of assessment are set aside under Section 30 of the 1948 Act, it is the provisions of sub section (5) of Section 21, which shall apply. It has further proceeded to hold that the time period within which a fresh order of assessment is liable to be made is to be computed from the date of service of the order or in case where parties were duly represented, from the date when the order was passed. The judgment of the Full Bench being of the jurisdictional High Court was clearly binding on the Tribunal. The mere fact that the assessee chose not to raise this objection before the assessing authority, would not amounting to clothing him with jurisdiction of which he otherwise stood denuded by virtue of sub section (5). It is trite to note that the issue of jurisdiction is one which could have been raised at any stage by the assessee and in any view of the matter, alleged consent, waiver or acquiescence would not confer upon him jurisdiction which he otherwise did not have. The Commissioner also, therefore, could not have conferred on the assessing authority jurisdiction to pass a fresh order of assessment after the period of six months as prescribed in sub section (5) had expired. The reasoning adopted by the Tribunal, therefore, in rejecting the second appeal of the revisionist cannot be sustained. 4. From a perusal of the order passed under Section 30, however this Court finds that the department was not represented on the date i.e. 14 August 2002 when the application came to be allowed. Learned Standing Counsel also has sought to raise a dispute with respect to the date of service of the order dated 14 August 2002 on the assessing authority. Learned Standing Counsel also has sought to raise a dispute with respect to the date of service of the order dated 14 August 2002 on the assessing authority. In that view of the matter, in the opinion of this Court, it would be appropriate if the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal which may consider as to whether the order of assessment dated 3 July 2003 would stand the test of Section 21(5) of the 1948 Act as interpreted by the Full Bench of this Court and whether the said fresh order of assessment would be beyond the period of six months from the date when a copy of the order under Section 30 is stated to have been served upon the assessee. 5. Accordingly, this revision shall stand allowed. The order of the Tribunal dated 19 October 2010 shall stand set aside. The matter shall stand remitted back to the Tribunal for a decision afresh in light of the observations made herein above.