https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26910 A settlement under section 34(1B) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was treated as conclusive only for matters actually covered by it, and section 34(1D) barred reopening of those settled matters. On the facts, the sums derived from encashment of high denomination notes were held to form part of the income settled for assessment year 1947-48, so they could not be shifted to another year. Rectification of the earlier assessments was also sustained: because the original assessments arose under the repealed 1922 Act, the rectification had to be tested under the corresponding old-Act provision, and the later withdrawal of excess profits tax and business profits tax relief was not barred by the settlement. en-us Tue, 14 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:30:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26910 A settlement under section 34(1B) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was treated as conclusive only for matters actually covered by it, and section 34(1D) barred reopening of those settled matters. On the facts, the sums derived from encashment of high denomination notes were held to form part of the income settled for assessment year 1947-48, so they could not be shifted to another year. Rectification of the earlier assessments was also sustained: because the original assessments arose under the repealed 1922 Act, the rectification had to be tested under the corresponding old-Act provision, and the later withdrawal of excess profits tax and business profits tax relief was not barred by the settlement. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 14 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26910