1967 (8) TMI 28

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reference raises a question of limitation under the Travancore Income-tax Act, 1121. We are concerned with the assessment years 1122 to 1124, Malayalam Era, corresponding to 1948-49 to 1950-51, the accounting period in each of the years commencing from August 17. Originally the assessments for these years were made on September 10, 1949, July 31, 1952 and November 29, 1952, respectively. In purpor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ars that there was concealment of income was not in dispute. The Tribunal was of the view that the effect of section 13 of the Finance Act, 1950, was not to repeal section 41(1) and that the extended period of limitation, namely, eight years, was still available even after April 1, 1950. The revised orders were, therefore, held to be in time. The question for our decision under section 66 (1) is :....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ther case, of four years from the end of the year in which the income, profits or gains were first assessable : Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply to a reassessment made in pursuance of an order under section 44, section 45 or section 113. " This sub-section virtually corresponds to section 34(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. Section 41(1)(c) is to the effect that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Finance Act, 1950, and that, therefore, the levy of penalty was barred, the Supreme Court held that the penalty proceedings which were initiated under section 40 of the Hyderabad Income-tax Act would be continued after the enactment of the Finance Act, 1950. On that basis the order of penalty was upheld. This view was based on two grounds. One is that that the expression " assessment " as ....