COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. KRISHNAN N

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following two questions expect our answer :

(2.) WHETHER, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the light of the observation of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Onkar Saran and Sons [1992] 195 ITR 1 (at page 8), 'it is only the determination of the correct total income for the assessment year in question that is being redone' and in the light of the first illustration (at page 8) resulting in the conclusion, 'that certainly cannot be the effect of the legal provisions', are not the order of the Tribunal and the decisions of the Kerala and Bombay High Courts, relied on, against the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Onkar Saran and Sons [1992] 195 ITR 1 ?"

(3.) ON reading even the earlier decision of the apex court in ONkar Saran's case [1992] 195 ITR 1, especially the portion appearing at page 8 of the report which has been carved out in question No. 2, it would have to be said that when the original assessment proceedings have been finalised and reassessment proceedings have been initiated to assess escaped income, it is observed, it is only the determination of the correct total income for the assessment year in question that is being redone. In the process of reasoning, in the context, the apex court has also referred to its earlier decision in V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT/CEPT [1970] 75 ITR 373. The apex court has emphasised the purpose of reassessment proceedings. However, in the light of the subsequent decision, the questions get neatly answered.