Assessee, a SEBI-regulated Category III AIF trust, sought advance ruling on whether section 164 applied merely because names of investors/beneficial interests were not mentioned in the original trust deed. The BAR, relying on CBDT Circular No. 13 of 2014, held that in absence of such particulars in the original trust deed, the trust was indeterminate and liable to maximum marginal rate in the hands of trustees. Allowing the writ petition, the Delhi High Court held that under section 12 of the SEBI Act and regulations 3, 4, 6 and 7 of the SEBI (AIF) Regulations, an AIF cannot accept commitments/investments until registration is obtained; hence, at the stage of execution/registration of the original trust deed, it is legally impossible to name investors or specify their beneficial interests. Law does not compel performance of the impossible and the maxim lex non cogit ad impossibilia squarely applied. Once the investors and their shares became ascertainable/determinable under contribution agreements after registration, the requirement of certainty stood satisfied and section 164(1) was not attracted. The Court also held that para 6 of CBDT Circular No. 13 of 2014, suggesting that contrary High Court decisions would operate only within that High Court’s territorial jurisdiction, was contrary to settled judicial discipline, since a decision of a Constitutional Court on a pure question of law binds Revenue authorities nationwide unless overturned. Accordingly, the  order of Board for Advance Rulings quashed and set aside.