TMI Blog1957 (9) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax Officer, Cuddalore, revising the assessment of the petitioner under section 35 of the Income-tax Act is challenged in this petition as beyond the jurisdiction and power of the officer. The proceedings are concerned with the assessment year 1953-54. The petitioner who is the assessee was a non-resident and he was residing at Penang. For the assessment year in question the Income-tax Officer c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax including super-tax which would have been payable on his total world income had it been his total income the same proportion as his total income bears to his world income. Before the assessment was completed, that is, before 31st December, 1953, the petitioner made a declaration contemplated by the first proviso to section 17(1) on 29th September, 1953, and the Income-tax Officer treated this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the computation of the tax should have been on the basis of the maximum rate applicable under section 17(1) and not under the first proviso. The assessee raised an objection to the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer stating that no mistake had been committed to justify any rectification under section 35. This was overruled and an order was passed on 10th May, 1959, rectifying the assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... viso to section 17 was filed by the assessee though out of time, if regard were had only to the dates specified in the first proviso, is not in controversy. That this declaration was treated by the assessing officer as one within the first proviso and that the assessment proceeded on the basis that the assessee had properly exercised his option is also not in dispute. The point, however, on which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
