Limitation under the Black Money Act starts only after service of notice; pre-notice days cannot be excluded from assessment time.

Service of notice under section 10(1) is the jurisdictional trigger for assessment proceedings under the Black Money Act, and the limitation under section 11(1) can be extended only by excluding time that falls within the running assessment period. A period preceding service of notice cannot be treated as excludable under Explanation 1(iii), because exclusion presupposes an existing limitation timeline. On the stated facts, only the period from 25.11.2020 to 25.05.2021 was excludable, and the assessment order had to be passed by 29.09.2023. The order dated 30.09.2023 was therefore time barred, without jurisdiction, and non est in law.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for computing limitation under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, the period under Explanation 1(iii) to section 11 could include days preceding service of notice under section 10(1), and whether the assessment order dated 30.09.2023 was barred by limitation.

Analysis: Section 10(1) makes service of notice the jurisdictional trigger for commencement of assessment proceedings. Section 11(1) prescribes the time limit for completion of assessment, while Explanation 1 permits exclusion only of time that forms part of the running limitation period. A period anterior to commencement of proceedings cannot logically be treated as an excludable period, because exclusion presupposes that the period sought to be excluded first falls within the assessment timeline. On the facts, the reference dated 11.11.2020 to 24.11.2020 preceded service of notice on 25.11.2020 and therefore lay outside the assessment period.

Conclusion: The exclusion period could validly run only from 25.11.2020 to 25.05.2021, amounting to 182 days. The assessment order ought to have been passed on or before 29.09.2023, and the order dated 30.09.2023 is time barred, without jurisdiction, and non est in law.

---