9911796707
TMI Blog1974 (11) TMI 4X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t period by way of dividend on shares and interest from deposits. The original assessments for the relevant years were completed on January 31, 1956, December 27, 1956, and February 28, 1958. The residential status adopted in those years was "resident and ordinarily resident person". Income-tax and super-tax were calculated at the rates applicable on the total income. In the course of the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1958-59, corresponding to the year ending on December 31, 1957, the assessee filed a declaration under section 17(1) of the Act on March 24, 1959, claiming to be assessed at rates appropriate to the total world income. This assessment was completed on March 23, 1960, in the status of a "non-resident" The application under section 17(1) was rejected. As the Income-tax Officer found that the assessee was a non-resident in the three previous years ending on December 31, 1954 to December 31, 1956, and his total income had been assessed to income-tax at the normal rates and further as he had failed to make the requisite declaration under section 17(1) within the requisite time, the Income-tax Officer formed the view that the earlier assessments had been ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asoning for not accepting the declaration under section 17(1) was not correct. In this connection the Appellate Assistant Commissioner referred to his order in the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 1958-59, wherein he had held that the assessee had sufficient cause for not filing the declaration under section 17(1) when the assessee became first assessable. It was also held that the failure to file the declaration had not resulted in a reduction of tax liability. The declaration filed on March 24, 1959, by the assessee, in the opinion of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, could be availed of for the assessments for the three years in question as the assessment orders consequent upon the reopening of assessments were being made subsequent to that date. The department went up in appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Tribunal accepted the reasoning of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and dismissed the appeal. On being moved by the Commissioner of Income-tax the Tribunal referred the question reproduced above to the High Court. The High Court in answering the question against the assessee referre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... our opinion, signify not only assessments for the subsequent years but would also cover assessments for the earlier years in case the assessments for those earlier years are being made subsequent to the filing of the declaration. The words "all assessments thereafter" have a wide amplitude and we see no cogent reason for not giving them their natural meaning or for restricting their scope. Those words would include within their ambit all assessments made subsequent to the filing of the declaration and it would be wrong to so construe them as if the legislature had used the words "all assessments for the subsequent years". We are unable to subscribe to the view taken by the High Court that the assessments referred to in the words reproduced above mean only the original assessments and not the reassessments made under section 34 of the Act. According to section 2(8) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the word "assessment" includes reassessment. Although such a definition was not there in the Act of 1922, the word "assessment" in the second proviso to section 17(1) of the Act must necessarily, in our opinion, cover reassessment under section 34 of the Act. In the case of A. N. Lakshman S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble to pay. It has been contended before us that the Finance Act and the Income-tax Act should be read together as forming one code, and so read the word 'assessment' and 'reassessment' acquire definite and distinct connotations. We are unable to agree, for the reasons which we have already given, that even if we read the Finance Act along with the Income-tax Act the word 'assessment' can be given a restricted meaning. To repeat those reasons : the Income-tax Code itself uses the word 'assessment' in different senses, and in the context and collocation of the words of the Finance Act, the word 'assessment ' is capable of bearing a comprehensive meaning only." In the context of section 17(1) of the Act the word "assessment" must necessarily include reassessment under section 34 of the Act. To hold otherwise would result in an anomalous situation. This can best be illustrated by taking a concrete case. An assessee files a declaration under section 17(1) of the Act in respect of the assessment year 1955-56. Supposing his assessment for the year 1956-57 is reopened and an order for reassessment is made. In case the declaration made under section 11(1) can be availed of only for the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... believe that income, profits or gains chargeable to income-tax have escaped assessment for any year or have been under-assessed or assessed at too low a rate or have been made the subject of excessive relief under the Act or excessive loss or depreciation allowance has been computed. The first of the above five contingencies deals with income, profits or gains chargeable to income-tax escaping assessment. In such an event the Income-tax Officer would, after initiating proceedings under section 34 make assessment of such income, profit or gain. In the other four contingencies, the order made by the Income-tax Officer would be for reassessing such income, profit or gain or recomputing the loss or depreciation allowance. If the view propounded on behalf of the revenue were to be accepted that assessment does not include reassessment made under section 34 of the Act, the result would be that the benefit of the declaration made under section 17(1) of the Act, in case other conditions are fulfilled, would be available only in the first contingency mentioned above relating to escaped assessment and not in the remaining contingencies because they pertain to reassessment. This would certai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
