THE FIRST ADDITIONAL INCOME-TAX OFFICER, MYSORE versus H.N.S. IYENGAR

Citation: [1962] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 05-10-1961 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.K. DAS · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

" •. 
THE SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
THE FIRST ADDITIONAL INCOME-TAX 
OFFICER, MYSORE 
v. 
H. N. S. IYENGA!'t 
(S. K. DAS, J. L. KAPUR and M. HIDAYATULLAH, JJ.) 
Income 
Ta.~-lnco171e escaping 
assessment-Notice to 
mrike 
re!u.rn-T.imitation-Eight years, if from 
end of 
acconnti'.ng or 
a.Jse.~8ment 
y~ar-' Any year', Meaning of-
ln'lian ln~ome-tric Act, 1922 (II of 1.922), 88. 22(1), 34 (J)(a)-
India.n Fin.once Act, 1948 (XX of 1948). 
In 1956 a notice was issued to the respondent under 
s. 34(l)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, calling upon him to 
make a return on the ground that his income had escaped 
assessment for the year ending 31st March, 1949. The respon-
dent l'.'.on tended that notice under s. 34 of the Act could not be 
i.sued to him because of the lapse of eight years from the 
end of the accounting year. This contention was not accepted 
by the Income Tax Officer. The asse,,ee then filed an ap-
plication under Art. 226 of the Constitution. The High Court 
held on a construction of s. 34 of the Act, that the words 
'any year' as used ins. 34(l)(a) mean, not the assessment 
year but the accounting year. 
The Income-tax officer ap-
pealed. The contention was that the words 'any year' in cl. (a) 
refer to tht'. assessment year. 
Held, that the correct way of interpreting s. 34(l)(a) of 
the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, read with the provisions of 
the Indian Finance Act, 1948, is that the words •for any 
year
1 mean for any assessment year and not for any accounting 
year because the as::;cssment is tor the assessment year although 
of the income which accrued in the previous year (year of 
account). The nreviou• year for different heads of income 
falling under different sections of the Indian Income-tax Act 
may vary but <loes not give different starting 
points of 
limitation for different sources of income. 
Panna Lal Nand Lal Bhandari v. Commis•ioner of Income 
Tax, Bombay City, [1961] 2 S. C.R. 35, referred to. 
C. W. Spenoer v. Income-tax Officer, Madras, [1957] 31 
I. T. R. 107, approved. 
CrvIL APPELLATE JuR1snroTION: Civil Appeal 
No. 60 of 1961. 
1961 
o,,,,,,., 6. 
J9fiJ 
11u First At!ditional 
Jn&om1-ta.~ 0 J/1ct', 
Mysore 
v. 
H. N. S. l;yt•f"' 
2 SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1962] SUPP. 
Apµeal from the judirroent and order dated 
September 15, 1958, of the l\Iysore High Court at 
Bangalore in Writ Petition No. 144 of 1D57. 
K. N. Rajagopal Sastri and P. D. Menon, for 
for the appellant. 
Rumeshux1r Nath, S. N. Andley and P. L. Vohra, 
• 
for the respondent. 
1961. October 5. The Judgment of the Court 
wM delivered by 
KAPt'R, J.-This is an appeal on a certificate 
of the High Court under Art. 133 ( l )( c) of the 
Constitution against the judgment and ordC'r of 
the High Court of Jllysore passed in a petition 
under Art. 226 of the Constitution of Indh. The • 
appellant before us is the lst Additional Income-
tax Officer and the respondent is the assessee, and 
the matter relates to tho assessment vear 1948-49 
tho accounting year being 1947·48. 
• 
The facts of this appeal are 
as follows : 
On November 27, 1956, a notice was issued to tho 
-
respondent under s. 34 (l)(a) of the Indian Income-
tax Act calling upon him to make a return on the 
ground that his income had escaped assessment 
for the assessment year ending 31st March, 1949. 
This notice was served on the respondent on 
No\·ember 29, 1956. The responde?1t objected that 
no notice under s. 34 of the Income-tax Act could 
be issued to him because of the lapse of eight yea.rs 
frvm the end of the accounth1g year. This objection 
was overruled and the respondent filed on June 12, 
19:37, in the High Court of Mysore, a petition under 
" 
Art. ~~6 of the Constitution for a writ of certiorari 
quashing the order made by the Income.tax 
Officer. 
The High Court held on a construction of 
s. 34 of the Indian Income.tax Act, that the word~ 
"any year" ns used in s. 34(1 )(a) mean not the 
assessment year but the accounting year. It is 
that question which is required to be decided in 
this appeal. Section 34(1 )(a) reads :-
• 
..
• 
(I) S.C.R. 
SUPREME OOURT REPORTS 
s. 34(1) "If-
3 
(a) the Income-tax Officer has reason 
to believe that by reason of the omission or 
failure on the part of an assessee to make a 
return of his income under section 22 for any 
year or to disclose fully and truly all material 
facts necessary for his assessment for that 
year, income .• profits or gains chargeable to 
income-tax have escaped assf'sRment 
for 
tha

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