Reassessment after remand: delay alone does not vitiate the assessment unless it is unreasonable, unexplained, and prejudicial.

In reassessment proceedings after remand, delay does not by itself vitiate the assessment. The reassessment must be completed within a reasonable time, but invalidity arises only if the delay is unreasonable, unexplained, and shown to have caused real prejudice to the assessee or made the exercise of power improper. Rule 32(21) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules, 1963, which requires preservation of accounts for four years after the accounting year, does not excuse an assessee from preserving records during pending remand proceedings. On the stated facts, the assessee did not show prejudice or readiness to assist, and the delay did not invalidate the reassessment.

---

---

Issues: Whether inordinate delay in completing a reassessment after remand by the appellate authority, by itself, vitiates the assessment.

Analysis: A reassessment made after remand is expected to be completed within a reasonable time, but delay alone does not automatically invalidate the assessment. The decisive question is whether the delay is so long and unexplained that it causes real prejudice to the assessee and makes the exercise of power unreasonable or improper. Rule 32(21) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules, 1963, which requires preservation of accounts for four years after the accounting year, does not mean that an assessee in remand proceedings can disregard the need to preserve records until the reassessment is finalised. Where the assessee has not shown readiness to assist the reassessment or has not demonstrated resulting prejudice, and the assessing authority's delay is not shown to be unjustified in the setting of remand, the assessment is not vitiated merely because of lapse of time.

Conclusion: The inordinate delay in making the reassessment after remand did not, on the facts, vitiate the assessment.

Ratio Decidendi: In reassessment proceedings after remand, delay invalidates the assessment only when it is unreasonable, unexplained, and shown to have caused prejudice; delay by itself is not enough.

---