Rectification after appellate merger is limited to issues not decided in appeal; wrong provision reference may be only an irregularity.

Rectification of an assessment after appellate merger is confined to matters not already considered and decided in appeal; section 154(1A) was treated as permitting correction only within that limited scope. A notice issued for an assessment year governed by the repealed Income-tax Act, 1922 was not invalid merely because it referred to section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, since that reference was treated as an irregularity rather than a jurisdictional defect. However, rectification could not be used to reopen issues merged in the appellate order beyond the narrow statutory exception. The impugned notice and proceedings were quashed.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether, after the assessment order had merged in the appellate order, the Income-tax Officer could initiate rectification proceedings; (ii) whether, for an assessment completed under the repealed Income-tax Act, 1922, rectification could be pursued under the Income-tax Act, 1961, and whether the impugned notice was invalid for that reason.

Issue (i): whether, after the assessment order had merged in the appellate order, the Income-tax Officer could initiate rectification proceedings.

Analysis: Once an appeal is decided, the operative order is the appellate order. However, the Court treated the later rectification power in section 154(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as authorising rectification only in respect of matters not already considered and decided in appeal. On the facts, the question of the cost of the bonus shares had not been examined or decided by either the Income-tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner when the loss claim was allowed or disallowed in general terms.

Conclusion: The objection based on merger did not by itself invalidate rectification proceedings, but the rectification power remained limited to matters not decided in appeal.

Issue (ii): whether, for an assessment completed under the repealed Income-tax Act, 1922, rectification could be pursued under the Income-tax Act, 1961, and whether the impugned notice was invalid for that reason.

Analysis: The Court held that, in view of the binding appellate authority, a notice referring to section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 did not by itself nullify rectification proceedings for an assessment year governed by the repealed Act. The saving provisions preserved the assessment proceedings, and the reference to the 1961 Act in the notice was treated as an irregularity rather than a jurisdictional defect. At the same time, rectification could not proceed under section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 so as to reopen an order which had already merged in the appellate order, unless the case fell within the limited scope of section 154(1A).

Conclusion: The impugned notice and all proceedings taken under it were quashed, and the respondents were directed to forbear from taking further steps.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded to the extent that the attempted rectification was struck down and the revenue authorities were restrained from proceeding further under the impugned notice.

Ratio Decidendi: Rectification of an assessment already dealt with in appeal is confined to matters not considered and decided in the appellate proceedings, and a notice referring to the wrong rectification provision does not necessarily defeat jurisdiction where the power otherwise exists.

---