Section 34 reassessment notice need not use a prescribed form where it clearly informs the assessee of escaped income.

A notice under Section 34 need not follow any prescribed form if it adequately informs the assessee of the matter to be answered. The article also explains that where the tax authorities have found as a fact that dividend income alleged to have escaped assessment was not included in the earlier assessment, the assessee cannot insist on reopening the entire assessment merely by claiming that the income was assessed under another head. The operative point is that a factual finding on non-inclusion of the income defeats any demand for a de novo reopening of the whole assessment; only the escaped income may be brought to tax.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee could defeat proceedings under Section 34 by showing that dividend income alleged to have escaped assessment had in truth been included in the earlier business assessment, and whether the Income-tax Officer was bound to reopen the whole of the earlier assessment on that basis.

Analysis: A notice under Section 34 need not be in any prescribed form so long as it adequately informs the assessee of the matter to be met. More importantly, the controversy turned on whether the dividend income had in fact been brought into account in the earlier assessments. The assessment order and the appellate and revisional orders recorded a factual conclusion that the large dividend receipts had not been included under the head business, and that only the income which had escaped assessment was being brought to tax. In those circumstances, the assessee could not insist that the earlier assessments be reopened as a whole, nor could he displace the factual finding by asserting that the income might have been assessed under a different head.

Conclusion: The assessee failed on the merits of the reference, and the challenge to the Section 34 assessment was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The proceedings under Section 34 were upheld, and the application was dismissed with costs.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the income-tax authorities have found as a fact that income alleged to have escaped assessment was not included in the earlier assessment, the assessee cannot require a de novo reopening of the whole assessment merely by asserting that it was assessed under another head.

---