Service of statutory notice and limitation controlled the validity of reassessment under agricultural income-tax law.

Proof of service of the statutory notice under section 19(2) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939 was necessary before a valid assessment could be made. An order directing issue of notice and an entry in the issue register were insufficient to prove actual issue and service, so a best judgment assessment under section 20(4) could not be sustained. The matter then fell within section 30, which allowed reassessment only within the prescribed limitation period. Because the reassessment was made beyond three years from the end of the relevant financial year, it was barred by limitation and without jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether service of notice under section 19(2) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939 was established and, if not, whether the assessment could be sustained as a best judgment assessment or under section 30 of the Act.

Analysis: The validity of the assessment depended on proof that the statutory notice under section 19(2) had been served after the general notice under section 19(1). The materials produced by the department showed only an order directing issue of notice and an entry in the issue register, but they did not establish actual issue and service of the notice on the petitioner. In the absence of such service, the officer could not proceed to make a best judgment assessment under section 20(4). The case therefore fell within the scope of section 30, which permitted reassessment only within the prescribed period. As the reassessment was beyond three years from the end of the relevant financial year, it was barred and without jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The assessment was invalid and without jurisdiction for want of proved service of notice under section 19(2), and the limitation under section 30 also barred the action.

---