<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1968 (11) TMI 17 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7483</link>
    <description>A valid return already on record, with assessment proceedings still pending, prevents income from being treated as escaped assessment for the purpose of notice under section 34(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Section 34(1)(a) was therefore inapplicable because there was no failure to file returns or disclose material facts, and section 34(1)(b) also did not apply because escapement presupposes completed assessment or post-assessment discovery, not a pending proceeding. Although the second proviso to section 34(3) may extend limitation where a reassessment gives effect to a finding or direction, that exception is confined to a person intimately connected with the assessment under appeal. The reassessments and notices were therefore without jurisdiction and invalid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Nov 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 16:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=46533" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (11) TMI 17 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7483</link>
      <description>A valid return already on record, with assessment proceedings still pending, prevents income from being treated as escaped assessment for the purpose of notice under section 34(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Section 34(1)(a) was therefore inapplicable because there was no failure to file returns or disclose material facts, and section 34(1)(b) also did not apply because escapement presupposes completed assessment or post-assessment discovery, not a pending proceeding. Although the second proviso to section 34(3) may extend limitation where a reassessment gives effect to a finding or direction, that exception is confined to a person intimately connected with the assessment under appeal. The reassessments and notices were therefore without jurisdiction and invalid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Nov 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7483</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>