9911796707
TMI Blog1957 (4) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat Act to the State in the year 1942. The appellant was assessed to income-tax for the above years under the said Act by three separate orders of the Income- tax Officer, dated respectively December 29, 1947, January 9, 1948, and March 29, 1949, and the tax was duly realised by the State authorities. The State merged with Madhya Pradesh with effect from August 1, 1949, by the States Merger (Governors' Provinces) Order, 1949; and by the Taxation Laws (Extension to Merged States and Amendment) Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to in the judgment as the Taxation Laws Act), the Indian Income-tax Act was extended to the State of Nandgaon with effect from April 1, 1949. In the years 1954 and 1955, the Income-tax Officer issued three separate n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nowhere imposed any limit of time within which the assessment under the provisions of sections 23 and 29 was to be made, and that the service of notice of demand could, therefore, be made at any time. This decision was explained by their Lordships in Commissioner of Income- tax v. Khemchand Ramdas [1938] 6 I.T.R. 414, in which it was observed that when once a final assessment is arrived at, it cannot be reopened except in the circumstances detailed in sections 34 and 35 of the Act. In this connection, their Lordships of the Mysore High Court observed in City Tobacco Mart v. Income-tax Officer [1955] 27 I.T.R. 549: "The view taken by the Privy Council was that an assessment became complete when the Income-tax Officer determined the am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... kshmana Shenoy v. Income-tax Officer [1955] 27 I.T.R. 572 was taken. Their Lordships also referred to Bhailal Amin and Sons v. R.P. Dalal [1953] 24 I.T.R. 229 in support of their view, but that case appears to have involved another question and not the one under consideration. It is contended on behalf of the appellant that the words "assessment" and "re-assessment" have been used in different senses in the Income-tax Act itself and, therefore, the use of the word "assessment" alone in section 7 of the Taxation Laws Act should be interpreted to exclude the process of "re-assessment." In the normal sense "to assess" means "to fix the amount of tax due or to determine such amount". ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in which the income was assessed or was assessable according to that law before the date of merger. It is difficult to see why only a part of the process of assessment should be saved and the other part repealed. According to the interpretation sought to be put by the appellant, a curious result would follow inasmuch as section 34 would be partly saved and partly repealed. It would be available for enabling assessment to be made in cases in which no assessment had been made at all; but it would not be available for enabling assessment to be made in cases where there had been an assessment at too low a rate or with unjustified exemptions. This could not obviously be the intention. In the Mysore case [1955] 27 I.T.R. 549 cited above, relian ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ust first be given their ordinary, natural and popular meaning. If this is done it will be clear that "assessment" must include " re-assessment. " There is yet another reason why this should be so. In the case of repeal and re-enactment at the same time, it should be held that there was no repeal at all. It has been observed in Sutherland's Statutory Construction in paragraph 2035 as follows: "When, however, an existing statute is re-enacted by a later statute in substantially the same terms, a repeal by implication is effectuated only of those provisions which are omitted from re-enactment, while the unchanged provisions which are reiterated in the new enactment are construed as having been continuously in f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
