https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6649 Where income had escaped assessment and no proceedings under the repealed 1922 Act were pending when the Income-tax Act, 1961 commenced, section 297(2)(d)(ii) permitted a notice under section 148 for the relevant assessment year. The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the 1961 Act disclosed a contrary intention, so section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 did not preserve the old limitation or bar reopening under the new regime. A notice mistakenly linked to another assessment year did not prevent valid initiation for the year actually in issue under the 1961 Act. The reassessment notice was therefore valid. en-us Thu, 02 Sep 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6649 Where income had escaped assessment and no proceedings under the repealed 1922 Act were pending when the Income-tax Act, 1961 commenced, section 297(2)(d)(ii) permitted a notice under section 148 for the relevant assessment year. The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the 1961 Act disclosed a contrary intention, so section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 did not preserve the old limitation or bar reopening under the new regime. A notice mistakenly linked to another assessment year did not prevent valid initiation for the year actually in issue under the 1961 Act. The reassessment notice was therefore valid. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 02 Sep 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6649