COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CALCUTTA vs BIDHU BHUSHAN SARKAR (DEAD) THROUGH HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATI

The Supreme Court held that the term 'filed' in the context of the Income-tax Act, 1922, as used by the Additional Income-tax Officer, effectively meant 'disposed of', thus terminating the proceedings initiated by the first notice under Section 34. The Court ruled that the Principal Officer's subsequent notice under Section 34 was valid as no proceedings were pending from the Additional Officer's notice. The High Court's conclusion that the proceedings were still pending was erroneous, and the assessment made was not barred by limitation.