https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8029 A notice under section 59 of the Estate Duty Act was not invalid merely because it did not specify the property alleged to have escaped assessment; the provision only requires a call for a return, and the escaped assets may be identified in reassessment. Reassessment was also not barred by limitation, because the valid notice initiating proceedings was the earlier notice of 31 January 1967, not the later letter. On jurisdiction, the Controller could reopen the assessment under section 59(b) on post-assessment information, including material from appellate or tribunal orders, where that information had a rational nexus with the belief that chargeable property had escaped assessment. en-us Wed, 04 Mar 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Mar 2009 11:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8029 A notice under section 59 of the Estate Duty Act was not invalid merely because it did not specify the property alleged to have escaped assessment; the provision only requires a call for a return, and the escaped assets may be identified in reassessment. Reassessment was also not barred by limitation, because the valid notice initiating proceedings was the earlier notice of 31 January 1967, not the later letter. On jurisdiction, the Controller could reopen the assessment under section 59(b) on post-assessment information, including material from appellate or tribunal orders, where that information had a rational nexus with the belief that chargeable property had escaped assessment. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 04 Mar 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8029