Remand assessment proceedings remained a continuation of original assessment, so escaped-assessment limitation did not bar notice.

Reassessment proceedings after a High Court remand were treated as a continuation of the original assessment, not as a fresh escaped-assessment case. Because the assessment had already commenced on the filing of returns and the levy of purchase tax and sales tax had been made, the remand merely revived the pending proceedings for the limited purpose stated in the remand order. On that basis, the limitation period for escaped-assessment proceedings under section 11-A of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 did not apply in the same manner, and the notice issued after remand was not time-barred.

---

---

Issues: Whether reassessment proceedings initiated after remand by the High Court were governed by the period of limitation under section 11 or section 11-A of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, so as to render the notice issued after remand time-barred.

Analysis: The original assessment proceedings had already commenced on the filing of returns and the levy of purchase tax and sales tax had been made. The remand by the High Court did not create a fresh case of escaped assessment; it merely revived the pending assessment proceedings for the limited purpose indicated in the remand order. The governing principle, as applied from the Supreme Court authority on remanded assessments, was that where assessment proceedings are already in motion and remain pending after remand, the case is not treated as one of escaped assessment and the limitation for initiating escaped assessment proceedings does not apply in the same manner.

Conclusion: The reassessment proceedings were not barred by limitation, and the challenge to the notice and the fresh assessment proceedings failed.

---