The Court held that S. 150 enables departure from the limitation prescribed under S. 149 only for giving effect to a finding or direction issued in appellate, revisional or court proceedings, but does not contemplate rejuvenation of reassessment proceedings which were already barred by limitation on the date of issuance of notice. Sub-s. (2) of S. 150 carves out an exception and restricts application of sub-s. (1) where reassessment action was already time-barred when the order forming subject matter of appeal or revision was passed. In the present case, the notice under s. 148 was admittedly barred by limitation under s. 149(1) on the date of its issuance and the earlier remand order directing reconsideration of the assessee’s reply did not obliterate or extend statutory timelines. The AO was required to examine limitation before proceeding afresh and could not assume that remand diluted statutory time restrictions. Accordingly, the order passed under S. 148A(d) dt. 31-3-2024 and notice issued under S. 148 dt. 1-4-2024 were quashed as barred by limitation. (AY. 2014-15)