TMI Blog1967 (3) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pect of the income from property. In those returns Chiranji Lal mentioned that the status was "joint with sons". He did not indicate in the return that he was the karta of the family. For the assessment year 1948-49 two returns were filed, one in the status of an individual and the other in the status of "co-owners with one-fifth share each" in the name of "Chiranji Lal, Rameshwar Prasad, Om Prakash, Chandra Prakash and Srimati Sunhery Devi". The return was signed by the several persons who described themselves as co-owners. It was not mentioned that they constituted a Hindu undivided family and that the return was filed by the family. The Income-tax Officer made an assessment order against Chiranji Lal for the assessment years 1946-47, 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment orders from "individual" to "Hindu undivided family". The Appellate Tribunal now directed that to be done. Against the order of the Appellate Tribunal a reference was brought to this court. Three questions were referred: " 1. Whether there was any material to justify the view that the income from business could be treated as income of the Hindu undivided family of which Chiranji Lal was the karta ? 2. Whether there was any justification in law in making a joint assessment of the share incomes of Chiranji Lal, Rameshwar Prasad and Om Prakash and the income from property received by the Hindu undivided family headed by Shri Chiranji Lal ? 3. Whether the Tribunal could direct the authorities below to change the status of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated October 20, 1965, and of the Income-tax Officer dated May 25, 1966. The contention of the petitioners is that the Appellate Tribunal should have quashed the proceedings when the appeals were heard under section 66(5), because the notices under section 34, in consequence of which the returns were filed, were issued to Chiranji Lal as an individual. No assessment under section 34, it is urged, could be made against the Hindu undivided family in the absence of a notice under section 34 addressed to it. It is further contended that the Hindu undivided family having filed the returns for the assessment years 1946-47 to 1948-49 no assessment under section 34 could be made against the Hindu undivided family when those returns were still pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
