Regular assessment includes reassessment for penalty under advance-tax provisions when statutory context treats proceedings as de novo.

The phrase "regular assessment" in section 18A(9)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was read in its statutory context to include reassessment proceedings under section 34(1). Because section 34(1) treats escaped-income proceedings as de novo proceedings to which the Act applies as far as may be, penalty proceedings for filing an untrue advance-tax estimate could validly be initiated during reassessment. The Court distinguished interpretations of the same phrase in sections 18A(5) and 18A(6), holding that the meaning of "regular assessment" may differ according to context and subject-matter. The question was answered in the affirmative and against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the expression "regular assessment" in section 18A(9)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 includes reassessment proceedings under section 34(1), so that penalty proceedings for filing an untrue estimate of advance tax can validly be initiated during reassessment.

Analysis: Section 18A(9) attaches penal consequences where, in the course of proceedings connected with regular assessment, the Income-tax Officer is satisfied that the assessee furnished an estimate of tax payable which he knew or had reason to believe to be untrue. The Court read this expression in the setting of the provision and in the light of section 34(1), which authorises de novo proceedings for escaped income and applies the provisions of the Act to those proceedings as far as may be. On that footing, reassessment proceedings are treated as proceedings in connection with regular assessment for the purpose of section 18A(9). The Court distinguished the decisions dealing with sections 18A(5) and 18A(6), holding that the same phrase may bear different meanings in different parts of the statute when the context and subject-matter so require.

Conclusion: The expression "regular assessment" in section 18A(9)(a) includes reassessment under section 34(1), and the penalty proceedings were validly initiated. The question was answered in the affirmative and against the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory context shows that reassessment proceedings are de novo proceedings to which the Act applies as far as may be, the phrase "regular assessment" in a penalty provision may extend to reassessment proceedings and need not be confined to the original assessment.

---