Summary assessment appeal bar extends to challenges against tax liability, leaving the assessment undisturbed.

A proviso barring appeals from summary assessments was construed to exclude challenges not only to the amount or rate of tax, but also to the assessee's liability to assessment itself. Where the statutory defaults bringing the summary assessment provision into play were established, the assessee could not maintain an appeal to the Assistant Commissioner on the ground of non-liability under the Act. The Court further held that an order refusing or entertaining such an appeal could support only a limited reference on the preliminary jurisdictional question, and not a reopening of the substantive taxability issue through the reference process. The assessment therefore remained undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an assessee assessed under summary assessment could maintain an appeal to the Assistant Commissioner on the ground that he was not liable to be assessed under the Act, and whether the proviso to the appeal provision barred such appeal; (ii) Whether an order of the Assistant Commissioner dismissing or entertaining such an appeal could give rise to a reference on the preliminary question whether the assessment was properly made under the summary assessment provision.

Issue (i): Whether an assessee assessed under summary assessment could maintain an appeal to the Assistant Commissioner on the ground that he was not liable to be assessed under the Act, and whether the proviso to the appeal provision barred such appeal.

Analysis: The statutory scheme treated failure to file the prescribed return or to comply with notices for production of accounts or evidence as attracting assessment to the best of the officer's judgment under the summary assessment provision. The appeal provision allowed challenge to amount, rate, and liability generally, but the proviso expressly withdrew the right of appeal where the assessment was made under the summary assessment sub-section. On that construction, the bar operated not merely against objections to amount or rate, but also against denial of liability to tax in such cases. The Court therefore rejected the contention that lack of taxable income preserved an appeal despite the proviso.

Conclusion: The proviso barred the appeal. The assessee could not appeal to the Assistant Commissioner on the ground of non-liability to assessment under the Act.

Issue (ii): Whether an order of the Assistant Commissioner dismissing or entertaining such an appeal could give rise to a reference on the preliminary question whether the assessment was properly made under the summary assessment provision.

Analysis: An order deciding that no appeal lay was treated as a disposal of an appeal for the purposes of the reference provisions, and a question of law could arise whether the facts found brought the assessee within the summary assessment provision and its proviso. However, where the assessee had in fact incurred the statutory default and the appeal was barred, the merits of taxable liability could not be reopened through the reference machinery. The Court also declined to answer the broader substantive liability question once the appeal was held incompetent.

Conclusion: A limited reference could arise on the preliminary jurisdictional question, but the substantive liability issue was not open for decision in the assessee's favour and did not survive for adjudication.

Final Conclusion: The summary assessment stood, the assessee's appeal was barred by statute, and the reference failed, leaving the assessment undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute expressly bars appeal from a summary assessment, the bar extends to objections to liability as well as to amount or rate, and the merits of taxability cannot be re-agitated through the reference process once the statutory default bringing the bar into operation is established.

---