Wrong statutory reference in assessment does not by itself remove jurisdiction where substantive power exists under the correct regime.

Where an assessment year fell within the transition from the repealed Income-tax Act, 1922 to the Income-tax Act, 1961, the proper procedural course was to proceed under the old Act if the return had been filed before commencement of the new Act under section 297(2)(a). A mistaken reference to the 1961 Act did not, by itself, extinguish the Income-tax Officer's substantive power to assess, because that power existed under the corresponding provisions of the repealed Act. The error was treated as one of procedure or description of source of authority, not as a jurisdictional defect warranting writ interference.

---

---

Issues: Whether an assessment for an assessment year falling within the transition from the repealed Income-tax Act, 1922 to the Income-tax Act, 1961 was invalid merely because it was made under the 1961 Act instead of the old Act, and whether such wrong reference deprived the Income-tax Officer of jurisdiction so as to justify writ interference.

Analysis: Section 297(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 saved proceedings where the return had been filed before commencement of the new Act, and the petitioner contended that assessment had to proceed under the repealed Act. The Court accepted that the proper procedural route was to apply the old Act, but held that the officer's general authority to assess the income remained intact. A mistaken reference to the 1961 Act did not, by itself, render the assessment void ab initio where the power to make the assessment existed under the corresponding provisions of the repealed Act. The Court treated the error as one of procedure or description of source of power, not as a total absence of jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The assessment and consequential notices were not without jurisdiction and were not liable to be quashed in writ jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: A wrong citation of the statutory source does not invalidate an order if the authority otherwise possessed substantive power to make it under the correct legal regime.

---