Rajagopalan, J.-The petitioner is the son of the late S. K. Mohideen, hereinafter referred to as the assessee. The assessee was a partner of Dinshaw and Company and of the firm Palaniappa Chettiar (Jupiter Pictures) among other concerns. The assessment of Mohideen for the assessment years 1946-47 and 1947-48 was completed on 20th February, 1950. By that date the assessment of the firm of Palaniappa Chettiar for 1947-48 and that of Dinshaw and Company, for the years 1946-47 and 1948 had not been completed. Mohideen’s assessment was however completed, accepting provisionally his estimates of his share of the losses of those two partnership concerns. The assessee’s share of the looses of Dinshaw and Company was shown as Rs. 20,000 for 1946-47 and as Rs. 10,000 for 1947-48, and his share of the losses in the firm of Palaniappa Chettiar for 1947-48 was shown as Rs. 12,436.

The assessment of Dinshaw and Company for both the years was completed on 31st October, 1950. As against the Rs. 20,000 provisionally accepted as the assessee’s share of the loss for 1946-47, Rs. 15,839 was ascertained as his share. For the assessment year 1947-48 the assessee’s share of the loss was ascertained as Rs. 1,046 ; the provisional basis for assessment was Rs. 10,000. The assessment of the firm of Palaniappa Chettiar for 1947-48 was completed on 30th June, 1951, when the assessee’s share of the losses was determined as Rs. 2,009 as against the provisionally accepted figure of Rs. 12,346.

Act XXV of 1953, which amended section 35 of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and added sub-clause (5) to section 35, received the assent of the President on 24th May, 1953. But as section 1 (2) of Act XXV of 1953 directed that this amendment among others should be deemed to have come into force on 1st April, 1952, the position was as if section 35 (5) had become part of the Act on 1st April, 1952.

On 4th May, 1953, that is, even before Act XXV of 1953 received the assent of the President the Income-tax Officer issued a notice to the assessee under section 35 of the Act to show cause why the assessment for 1946-47 and 1947-48 should not be rectified on the basis of the completed assessments of Dinshaw and Company and Palaniappa Chettiar. The assessee represented that that could be done if the law permitted it. The Income-tax Officer however recorded:

“The assessee in his reply dated 24th March, 1954, intimated that he has no objection to the revision of the assessment.”

It was not disputed that as a statement of fact this was incorrect. The Income-tax Officer revised the assessment of the assessee for 1946-47 and 1947-48 by his order dated 27th March, 1954. An additional tax of Rs. 847-14-0 was demanded for 1946-47. The additional tax for 1947-48 that was demanded was Rs. 16,984-11-0. By 27th March, 1954, the period of four years for which section 35 (1) of the Act provided, computed from the date of the original assessment 20th February, 1950, had expired.

The assessee Mohideen died on 17th April, 1954. His son the petitioner, moved the Commissioner of Income-tax to revise the orders of the Income-tax Officer, dated 27th March, 1954, on the grounds, that the power to rectify the assessment of 1946-47 and 1947-48 under section 35 was barred by limitation, and that section 35 (5) could not apply to assessments completed before 1st April, 1952. The petitioner also pointed out to the Commissioner that the Income-tax Officer had refused the petitioner’s request to rectify the assessment for 1048-49, the original assessment for which also had been completed on 20th February, 1950. The petitioner would have been entitled to some relief had that rectification been allowed.

By his order, dated 30th September, 1955, the Commissioner rejected the petitioner’s request to set aside the orders of the Income-tax Officer directing his rectification of the assessment for 1946-47 and 1947-48. The Commissioner however instructed the Income-tax Officer:

“As a corollary, th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document