TMI Blog1958 (10) TMI 59X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... return in the attached form of his total income and world income assessable for the year ending 31st March, 1949. The petitioner appeared before the Income-tax Officer pursuant to the said notice and challenged the right of the Income-tax Officer to proceed under the said section. The main contention of the petitioner before the authority concerned was that the notice was given beyond the period mentioned in section 34 of the Income-tax Act. The Income-tax Officer did not accept that contention. The present petition has been filed as a result thereof. Two points were urged before us by Mr. Krishnamurthi appearing on behalf of the petitioner. In the first place he contended that the period within which a notice under clause (a) of sub-se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of excessive relief under the Act, or excessive loss or depreciation allowance has been computed, or (b)notwithstanding that there has been no omission or failure as mentioned in clause (a) on the part of the assessee, the Income-tax Officer has in consequence of information in his possession reason to 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 this Act, or that excessive loss or depreciation allowance has been computed, he may in cases falling, under clause (a) at any time within eight years and in cases falling under clause (b) at any time within four years ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the said part of clause (a) should be the failure on the part of the assessee to make a return of his income under section 22 for any year. Section 22 of the Income-tax Act inter alia provides that the Income-tax Officer shall, on or before the 1st day of May in each year, give notice by publication in the prescribed manner requiring every person whose total income during the previous year exceeded the maximum amount which is not chargeable to income-tax to furnish, within such period as mentioned in the said section a return in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner setting forth his total income and total world income during that year. It is clear from the provisions of section 22 that the return which has to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... two matters, one falling under clause (a) and the other under clause (b), different also appears from the fact that different periods of limitation have been prescribed for each of them. In my opinion, it is not possible to hold that because in clause (b) of subsection (1) of section 34 the year referred to is the assessing year, the year referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 34 must also be the assessing year. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the view contended for by the learned advocate for the petitioner is sound and should be upheld. Coming to the second contention of the learned advocate for the petitioner, I do not think that there is any substance in the same. The section does not require a notice to state ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leave to reargue the matter. His application was really an application for review although an oral one. The learned Government Pleader wanted to argue that section 34 as it now stands after the amendment in 1956 does not warrant the view which we have taken in this matter. We permitted him to argue the case on this point. The learned Government Pleader placed before us section 34 of the Income-tax Act as it now stands after its amendment in 1956 and contended that on a proper construction of the said section, we should hold that the period of eight years mentioned therein would start from the end of the assessment year, as originally contended by him. The material provisions of section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act after its amendment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , or for that year and any other year or years after which or after each of which eight years have elapsed, not being a year or years ending before the 31st day of March 1941. It appears on a proper reading of the said section that no change has been effected as to the period from which the computation of eight years mentioned in the said section has to start. The position, in my opinion, is exactly the same as it was before the amendment in 1956. The learned Government Pleader drew our attention to the proviso, wherein it is inter alia stated that the Income-tax Officer shall not issue a notice under clause (a) of sub-section (1) for any year if eight years have elapsed after the expiry of that year. He contended that any year menti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
