Period of limitation: revisional jurisdiction survives where revision is validly initiated within the one-year period despite later disposal.

The one-year provision in section 34 of the Madras Plantations Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1955 operates as a period of limitation rather than a jurisdictional bar: if revisional proceedings are validly initiated within that period the Commissioner's revisional power continues until proper termination of those proceedings and is not extinguished merely because final disposal occurs after the year has expired. The right of an assessee to have revision instituted within the statutory period cannot be defeated by subsequent administrative or procedural delay; petitions initiated within the year should be restored and dealt with on their merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the one-year period in section 34 of the Madras Plantations Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1955 operates as a mere period of limitation (so that revisional proceedings initiated within that period can be continued and concluded thereafter) or whether the Commissioner becomes functus officio and the revisional power is extinguished if the order is not made within one year.

Analysis: Section 34 authorises the Commissioner to exercise revisional power either on his own motion or on application by an assessee and, as applicable in the year of assessment 1956-57, contained a one-year time provision. The Court compared this provision with section 33A of the Income-tax Act to distinguish cases where legislative language treats the time limit as a hard bar to exercise of power and cases where the time limit operates as a limitation for initiating proceedings. The Court held that section 34 fixes a period of limitation applicable to both the Commissioner and the assessee; the critical point is whether proceedings are initiated within the statutory period. If proceedings are validly commenced within that period, the Commissioner's power subsists until the proceedings are properly terminated and is not rendered extinct merely because final disposal occurs after the period has expired. The right of an assessee to obtain revision filed within the period should not be defeated by subsequent administrative or procedural delay of the revising authority.

Conclusion: The one-year provision in section 34 of the Madras Plantations Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1955 is a period of limitation; where revisional proceedings are initiated within that period the Commissioner's revisional jurisdiction remains exercisable thereafter. The petition for revision is to be restored and dealt with afresh in accordance with law.

---