Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the surtax assessment for the assessment year 1965-66, completed more than four years after the end of the assessment year, was invalid in law for want of limitation.
Analysis: The Surtax Act did not prescribe any express time-limit for completion of assessment. The limitation for reopening under section 8(b) could not be treated as a limitation for completing the original assessment, and section 153 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was not made applicable by section 18 of the Surtax Act. The Court distinguished the authorities relied on by the assessee and held that, where no specific period is prescribed, the assessment must at least be completed within a reasonable time. Since surtax assessment depends on computation of total income under the Income-tax Act and could only follow completion of the income-tax assessment, the assessment made within less than two years after the income-tax assessment was not unreasonable.
Conclusion: The surtax assessment was not barred by limitation and was valid in law, in favour of the Revenue.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the governing statute prescribes no time-limit for completing an assessment, a limitation for reopening cannot be imported to control completion of the original assessment, and the assessment will be valid if made within a reasonable time in the statutory context.