9911796707
TMI Blog1973 (2) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ese references, were admitted to the benefits of that partnership. Originally the firm was assessed as an unregistered firm but on appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal registration was granted to the firm. Subsequently, Hari Babu was assessed and in his assessment, share income of the minors was also included. He appealed and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal held that the income of the minor sons could not be included in the income of Hari Babu and the minors should have been assessed separately. In the meantime, the Income-tax Officer, Aligarh, initiated proceedings under section 34(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act against the assessees as they had failed to file their returns for the assessment year in question. It appears that the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of this court the following questions : " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, notice under section 34(1)(a) was validly issued ? (2) If the answer to question No. 1 above is in the affirmative : (i) whether the notice under section 34(1)(a) was not barred by limitation ; and (ii) whether it was validly served ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessment made in the name of the minor through his guardian by the Income-tax Officer, Aligarh, on the basis of the notice under section 34(1)(a) issued by the Income-tax Officer, Delhi, was validly made? " The learned counsel for the assessee states that if question No. 1 is answered in favour of the assessee, the remaining two q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been received. It is true that a provisional assessment is to be followed by a regular assessment but so long as it is not replaced by a regular assessment, it is a good assessment and it cannot be said that a person who has been provisionally assessed under section 23B has not been assessed. A similar view has been taken by another Division Bench of this court in Jagannath Rameshwar Prasad v. Income-tax Officer (Special Appeal No 850 of 1967, decided on 25th January, 1973). Now, in the instant case, proceedings under section 34(1)(a) of the Act were initiated with a view to levying tax on the income of the assessees derived by way of their share in the firm, Jagdish Prasad Satya Prakash. That income had already been assessed under se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
