https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181757 Section 34 notice had to be validly served within the statutory period because service of notice was a condition precedent to assumption of jurisdiction. The limitation in that provision governed service itself, not merely issue of the notice, and the proviso concerning completion of assessment after valid service could not be read as substituting "issue" for "serve". Service on a person who was neither the principal officer nor otherwise duly authorised was not valid service under section 63, and Order V Rule 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure was inapplicable on the facts. On that basis, the notice was time-barred and further assessment proceedings could not continue. en-us Thu, 29 Mar 1956 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Apr 2016 15:53:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181757 Section 34 notice had to be validly served within the statutory period because service of notice was a condition precedent to assumption of jurisdiction. The limitation in that provision governed service itself, not merely issue of the notice, and the proviso concerning completion of assessment after valid service could not be read as substituting "issue" for "serve". Service on a person who was neither the principal officer nor otherwise duly authorised was not valid service under section 63, and Order V Rule 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure was inapplicable on the facts. On that basis, the notice was time-barred and further assessment proceedings could not continue. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 29 Mar 1956 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181757