Limitation in reassessment proceedings can extinguish jurisdiction, and the objection remains open despite not being raised earlier.

Expiry of the statutory period for reassessment after an ex parte assessment is set aside was held to remove the assessing authority's jurisdiction to make a fresh assessment. The appellate order recalling the ex parte assessment triggered the limitation period, and a reassessment made after that period was treated as beyond jurisdiction and liable to be set aside. Limitation was also treated as a jurisdictional objection, so the assessee could raise it in later appeal and revision even if it had not been pressed earlier. The contrary view that the point was waived was rejected, and consequential relief followed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the fresh assessment made after the appellate order allowing recall of the ex parte assessment was barred by limitation under Section 21(5) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. (ii) Whether the objection on limitation was a jurisdictional issue that could still be raised in the later appeal and revision.

Issue (i): Whether the fresh assessment made after the appellate order allowing recall of the ex parte assessment was barred by limitation under Section 21(5) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948.

Analysis: The provision was treated as fixing the time within which the assessing authority could make a fresh assessment after an ex parte assessment was set aside. The appellate order directing reopening under Section 30 was construed as an unequivocal command to reopen the proceedings, with the result that the limitation period began from the date of that order. The fresh assessment made after expiry of that period was therefore beyond jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The fresh assessment was barred by limitation and was liable to be set aside.

Issue (ii): Whether the objection on limitation was a jurisdictional issue that could still be raised in the later appeal and revision.

Analysis: Limitation was held to go to the authority of the assessing officer to reassess, and therefore to the jurisdiction to proceed further. Since a jurisdictional defect cannot be cured by waiver or omission, the assessee did not lose the right to raise the objection merely because it was not pressed at an earlier stage. The Tribunal's view that the point had been lost was rejected.

Conclusion: The limitation objection remained open and could validly be raised; the Tribunal's contrary finding was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded, the impugned tribunal order was set aside, and the assessee was granted consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute prescribes the time within which reassessment may be made after an ex parte assessment is set aside, expiry of that period extinguishes the assessing authority's jurisdiction to reassess, and a limitation objection of that nature is a jurisdictional plea that is not waived by omission at an earlier stage.

---