https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7563 Assessments on coparceners made pursuant to an appellate direction were treated as valid because they were made in consequence of, and to give effect to, the finding and direction in the earlier order. The limitation bar in section 34(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 did not apply, as the second proviso lifted the time restriction for assessments of persons connected with the original assessment and not strangers to it. The principle applied was that coparceners are sufficiently connected with the family assessment for the proviso to operate. Earlier constitutional objections to the proviso were rejected in light of later Supreme Court authority. en-us Tue, 03 Dec 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7563 Assessments on coparceners made pursuant to an appellate direction were treated as valid because they were made in consequence of, and to give effect to, the finding and direction in the earlier order. The limitation bar in section 34(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 did not apply, as the second proviso lifted the time restriction for assessments of persons connected with the original assessment and not strangers to it. The principle applied was that coparceners are sufficiently connected with the family assessment for the proviso to operate. Earlier constitutional objections to the proviso were rejected in light of later Supreme Court authority. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 03 Dec 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7563