TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1944 (2) TMI 20
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a) Whether the Governor had powers (i) to make the Regulations in question, and (ii) to order retrospective application thereof ? (b) Whether the Regulation in question comes within the powers of the Governor to legislate for the peace, order and good government of the Province ?" Question No. 1.-The facts which are necessary to be stated are these. For the year 1937-38 the assessee was assessed for a sum of ₹ 9,000 on the 4th of September, 1937. On the 7th May, 1938 proceedings under Section 34 of the Act were started on the ground that "income from Madras branches of the assessee had escaped taxation." On the 30th of November, 1938, these proceedings-terminated and the assessee was assessed for a sum of ₹ 22,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id that this Madras branch had escaped his notice. We considered the arguments of the parties and found that the notice under Section 34 of the Income-tax Act was issued on 29th July 1939 and in this notice it was not intended to assess the Madras branch or any other branch but the notice clearly stated that income of the appellant had partially escaped assessment. The appellant was not assessed in respect of his full income and because of the partial escapement the further notice was perfectly valid and the subsequent assessment was properly completed under Section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act." It does not seem to have been drawn to the notice of the Income-tax authorities that the provisions of Section 34 which apply in this cas....