Natural justice applies to limitation extension and case transfers when reasons and hearing are required.

Where a statute permits extension of assessment limitation or transfer of a case only on recorded reasons, principles of natural justice are implied unless expressly excluded. The note states that an extension under section 11(10) was ineffective because it was neither shown to have been made after hearing the assessee nor communicated, so it could not defeat the limitation bar. It also states that repeated transfers under rule 39C were unjustified because the record showed no reasons and no meaningful opportunity of hearing. The assessment was therefore treated as time-barred and unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Commissioner could validly extend the limitation period for completing assessment under section 11(10) without hearing the assessee and without communication of the extension order. (ii) Whether repeated transfer of the assessment case under rule 39C was valid in the absence of reasons and opportunity of hearing.

Issue (i): Whether the Commissioner could validly extend the limitation period for completing assessment under section 11(10) without hearing the assessee and without communication of the extension order.

Analysis: Section 11(10) empowers the Commissioner to extend the three-year period for assessment only for reasons recorded in writing. The requirement to record reasons was held to attract the implied application of natural justice because the assessee's rights were directly affected and the statute did not exclude hearing by express words or necessary intendment. The order extending time could not be treated as effective because it was neither shown to have been made after hearing the assessee nor communicated to the assessee.

Conclusion: The extension order under section 11(10) was invalid and could not save the assessment from the limitation bar.

Issue (ii): Whether repeated transfer of the assessment case under rule 39C was valid in the absence of reasons and opportunity of hearing.

Analysis: Rule 39C permits transfer of a case only after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing wherever possible and after recording reasons. The record disclosed multiple transfers of the assessment file without any material showing reasons for such transfers or justification for denying hearing. The procedural safeguards in the rule were therefore not complied with.

Conclusion: The transfers under rule 39C were not justified.

Final Conclusion: The assessment order was held to be time-barred and unsustainable, and the writ petition succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute authorises extension of limitation or transfer of a case on recorded reasons, and does not exclude hearing, the principles of natural justice are implied and the order must be reasoned and communicated before it can affect the assessee.

---