Pending assessment on filed returns is not escaped assessment, so rule 34 limitation does not bar fresh assessment on remand.

Where a dealer has filed returns, assessment proceedings continue until a final assessment order is made, so turnover cannot be treated as having escaped assessment merely because an original assessment is set aside and the matter is remanded for fresh assessment. The Mysore Sales Tax Rules, 1948, rule 34 applies to escaped assessments, not to pending assessment proceedings based on filed returns. On that basis, the SC concluded that limitation under rule 34 did not bar the fresh assessment on remand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment on remand was barred by limitation or could be treated as one for escaped assessment under rule 34 of the Mysore Sales Tax Rules, 1948, after the assessee had already submitted returns.

Analysis: The charging and return provisions under the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1948, and the assessment scheme under rule 17 show that where a dealer has submitted returns, the assessment process continues until a final order of assessment is made. On that basis, turnover cannot be said to have "escaped assessment" merely because the original assessment is set aside and the matter is remanded for fresh assessment. Rule 34 applies to escaped assessments, not to a case where assessment proceedings initiated on the filed returns are still pending. The Court therefore treated the question as concluded by precedent and held that no limitation under rule 34 barred the fresh assessment on remand.

Conclusion: The assessment was not barred by limitation under rule 34, and the challenge to the remand order failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a dealer has submitted returns, assessment proceedings remain pending until a final assessment order is made, and turnover cannot be treated as escaped assessment so as to attract the limitation for reassessment.

---