1939 (3) TMI 7

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e assessee is entitled to a deduction of Rs. 7,200 from the total income on account of maintenance allowance paid under a decree of a High Court to certain female members of the Hindu family to which he belongs." The learned Commissioner answered the first question in the affirmative, and the second in the negative. So far as the first question is concerned, the facts are that the assessee was assessed for the year 1936-37 on the 1st of July 1936, the assessment being based on the income of the preceding year, which expired on the 31st of March 1936. Then, in February 1937, there was a supplemental assessment, because it was found that the income of a house had been omitted from the original assessment, and the final assessment was at....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Commissioner of Income- tax had some justification. The words of Section 34 are very wide and say that "if for any reason the assessment is too low". I think those words are wide enough to cover such a mistake as existed in the present case, and I see no reason, therefore, why a fresh assessment should not be made under Section 34. It is suggested by Sir Jamshedji Kanga for the assessee that the assessment to income-tax had become final and conclusive for the purposes of income-tax by payment of the tax and, therefore, under Section 56 it was also final and conclusive for the purposes of super-tax. But the fallacy of that argument lies in saying that the assessment had become final and conclusive for the purposes of income-tax, because ....