Assessee, who is a power agent of one Tangarajan Nadar, sold property to Sethuprakasam.In his statement recorded under s. 131, Sethuprakasam stated that he purchased land from Tangarajan Nadar    and paid sale consideration also to Tangarajan Nadar.AO assessed capital gains in the hands of the assessee protectively on behalf of Tangarajan Nadar.Later, in a letter addressed to the CIT(A), the Dy. CIT requested the CIT(A) to consider the protective assessment as a substantive assessment. Tribunal held that no provision exists in the IT Act giving power to the AO to write a letter to the first appellate authority to consider and treat the protective assessment as a substantive assessment. CIT(A) rightly held that no protective assessment survives in the absence of a substantive assessment. The procedural mechanism for generating cause title is based on the system linked with the PAN of the assessee. There was no intervention in the order of the CIT(A) in making the cause title in the automatically generated system data. Therefore, the mention of the deceased assessee’s name in the cause title did not vitiate the order. (AY. 2009-10)