https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290107 Constitutional transitions did not extinguish pre-Constitution income-tax arrears, which were treated as continuing assets vesting in the Dominion of India and then the Union of India under the existing legal framework. Section 34(1A) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was construed as validly authorising reopening of specified completed assessments and as operating retrospectively to sustain notices already issued, so limitation-based objections failed. Retrospective fiscal legislation was held to be within Parliament's competence for tax relating to earlier periods, and the transfer of assessment proceedings to the Special Income-tax Officer, Central Circle, was upheld as legally effective. The notices and consequential transfer were therefore sustained. en-us Wed, 10 Apr 1957 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Sep 2020 12:19:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290107 Constitutional transitions did not extinguish pre-Constitution income-tax arrears, which were treated as continuing assets vesting in the Dominion of India and then the Union of India under the existing legal framework. Section 34(1A) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was construed as validly authorising reopening of specified completed assessments and as operating retrospectively to sustain notices already issued, so limitation-based objections failed. Retrospective fiscal legislation was held to be within Parliament's competence for tax relating to earlier periods, and the transfer of assessment proceedings to the Special Income-tax Officer, Central Circle, was upheld as legally effective. The notices and consequential transfer were therefore sustained. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Apr 1957 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290107