LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
βš–οΈ Ask the AI about your situation:πŸš— Car AccidentπŸ’Ό Work / Job🏠 Housing / EvictionπŸ‘ͺ Family / DivorceπŸ“‹ Contract DisputeπŸ’° Money Owed

STATE OF ASSAM AND ANOTHER versus DEVA PRASAD BARUA & ANOTHER

Citation: [1969] 1 S.C.R. 698 · Decided: 14-08-1968 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V. RAMASWAMI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

698 
STATE OF ASSAM AND ANOTHER 
v. 
DEVA PRASAD BARUA & ANOTHER 
August 14, 1968 
[V.-RAYIASWAMI ANO A. N. GROVER, JJ.J 
Assam Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1939. s.<. 19( 1), 20( 1) and 30--
Assessee (zlinK return of agricullural income after issue of general notice 
under s. 19( 1 )-Assessment not made durinR the assessment year 
nor 
lVithin three years specified in s. 30 hut made thereafter-if valid or barred 
by time.-Expression "aJ cny timβ€’"' in s. 19(3)-Scope of. 
A i:eneral notice was issued on April 13, 
1955 under s. 
19(1) 
of 
the As<am Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1939. for submission 
of the 
return for the assessment year 1955-56 for the purpose of agricultural 
income tax. 
The respondents filed a rc!urn on May 31, 1958 and on 
April 7, 1959, the Agricultural Income-t"x Officer made an assessment 
under s. 20( I) of the Act and a notice of demand was issued under s. 33 
on April 13, 1959. The respondents thereafter filed writ petitions under 
Arts. 226 and 227 challenging the assessments 
for that year and the 
subsequent year primarily on the ground that no individual notice had 
been served on them under s. 19(2) and therefore there was no jurisdic-
tion in the Agricultural Income-tax Officer to pass an order of assessment 
under s. 20( I) of the Act; and furthennorc an assessment under s. 30 
rclatin~ to escaped income was barred by limitation. 
The High Court 
allowed the petitions holdinf!, inter alia. that as the income received in the 
year 1954-55 had not been assessed in tbe financial year 1955-56. it had 
escaped assessment and could he assessed to tax only under s. 30; and 
the assessment in the present case was invalid as it was 
made beyond 
three years from the expiry of the financial year in which the income was 
received. 
On appeal to this Court, 
HELD : On the admitted fact that a general notice under s. 
19( 1) 
was published and that a return was filed hy the respondents in respect of 
the assessment years in question, s. 30 did not become applicable at all. 
Sub-section ( 3) of s. 19 states in categorical tenns that if any person has not 
furnished a return \vithin the time allowed hy or under sub-s. 
( l) or 
sub-s. {2), he may furni<>h a return at any tin1c heforc the assessment is 
made and any return so made shall be deemed to he made in due time 
under the section. \Vhere a voluntary return ha-. been filed pursuant to a 
general notice even after the expiry of the period mcnrioncd in that notice, 
the Income-tax Officer must proceed to asse~ ... the income by taking up 
that return. 
He cannot ignore that retum and serve on the asses.see a 
notice under the provisions relating to escaped income such as s. 30 in 
tbe present case or s. 34 in the Income-tax Act. [701 G-H; 702 F~FJ 
The words "at any time" in su!Hoction 3 of s. 19 of the Act cannot 
be interpreted to mean that they are limited to the yc;-ir of :1sse~~mcnt. 
Section 19 is in pari materia v.Β·ith s. 22 of the Income-tax: Act and th~ law 
which has been laid do\vn by this C..ourt while interpreting the provisions 
of that section must govern the con<:truction of the provisions of s. 19 11s 
well. [702 H-703 BJ 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
β€’ 
A 
D 
E 
IF 
G 
H 
ASSAM v. DEVA PRASAD (Grover, J.) 
699 
The Commissioner of Jncome~tax, Bonibay v. Ranchhoddas Karsondas 
Bombay, [1960] 1 S.C.R. 114; and Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras, 
v. S. Raman Chettiar [1965] I S.C.R. 883; referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISD!TCION : Civil Appeals Nos. 808 and 
809 of 1967. 
Appeals from the judgment and order dated April 23, 1963 
of the Assam High Court in Civil Rule Nos. 212 and 213 of 1962. 
Naunit Lal and Baharul Islam, for the appellants (in both 
the appeals) . 
Sukumar Mitra and D. N.- Mukhenee, for the respondents (in 
both the appeals) and the intervener (in C.A. No. 808 of 1967). 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Grover, J. 
These are two connected appeals by certificate 
from a common judgment of the High Court of Assam and Naga-
land allowing two petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution 
and setting aside the assessments made in respect of the 
respondents for the assessment years 1955-56 and 1957-58 under 
the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939, hereinafter called 
the Act. 
A general notice was issued under s. 19 ( 1) of the Act for 
submission of the return for the purpose of agricultural income 
tax on April 13, 1955 for the assessment year 1955-56. 
Accord-
ing to the departmental authorities a not

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.