( 1. ) THE decision rendered in this appeal shall also govern disposal of other connected appeal being ITA No. 62 of 2004, because both these appeals arise between the same parties and involve same point.

( 2. ) THIS is an appeal filed by the CIT under Section 260a of the IT Act, against an order dt. 25th Nov. , 2003, passed by Tribunal, Indore in ITA Nos. 16, 17 and 18/ind/2003. The appeal was admitted for final hearing on following substantial questions of law:

1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that requirement of Rule 45 of IT Rules, 1962 are directory and not mandatory? 2. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that a memo of appeal filed by the assessee before the CIT

(A) is valid even though it is not signed by the assessee but is signed by his lawyer?

( 3. ) FACTS of the appeal lie in a narrow compass. However, they need mention in brief infra to appreciate the controversy raised in this appeal.

( 4. ) THE respondent (assessee) suffered an adverse, assessment order, dt. 8th Feb. , 2002 (Annex. P-l), passed by AO under Section 143 (3) of the Act for the asst. yrs. 1990-91 and 1995-96. The respondent, i. e. , assessee, therefore, filed an appeal before