Reassessment limitation proviso requires an appellate finding necessary for relief; it cannot validate reassessment of a different year.

Question whether reassessment for an earlier year is saved by the second proviso to section 34(3) turns on whether an appellate "finding or direction" arose from proceedings in the appealed year and was necessary to give relief in that appeal; incidental or non-essential observations do not qualify. The proviso only lifts the limitation bar and does not expand appellate or assessing jurisdiction beyond the assessment year under appeal. Conclusion: reassessment for the earlier year was invalid because the appellate finding was not necessary to give relief in the appealed year.

---

---

Issues: Whether reassessment proceedings under section 34 of the Income-tax Act (initiated for assessment year 1946-47) were valid when commenced in consequence of an appellate finding in proceedings relating to assessment year 1947-48.

Analysis: The issue turns on the scope of the second proviso to section 34(3) and whether a finding or direction in an appellate order relating to one assessment year can remove the limitation bar and permit reassessment for a different assessment year. The proviso applies where reassessment is made "in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order" under specified sections; such a "finding" must be necessary for giving relief in respect of the assessment of the year under appeal. A finding merely incidental or not essential to disposal of the appeal for that year does not satisfy the proviso. Prior authority establishes that the appellate jurisdiction under the cited sections is confined to the assessment year under appeal and that the proviso lifts only the limitation bar without enlarging substantive jurisdiction to assess other years.

Conclusion: The reassessment for the earlier assessment year was not saved by the second proviso to section 34(3) because the appellate finding was not a finding necessary for giving relief in respect of the assessment year under appeal; therefore the reassessment proceedings were invalid.

---