TMI Blog2002 (2) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the additional ground by contending that the other legal representatives of the karta of the Hindu undivided family were not served with notices. - we declare that the assessment is not vitiated by non-service of notice on all the legal representatives of the deceased. - - - - - Dated:- 13-2-2002 - Judge(s) : DR. MOTILAL B. NAIK., M. NARAYANA REDDY. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by DR. MOTILAL B. NAIK J.-These two R. Cs. have come up before us on a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, at the instance of the assessee, framing the following question of law for the opinion of this court, viz., "Whether the assessment is vitiated by non-service of notice on all the legal representatives of the dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were completed on March 31, 1979, by the same Wealth-tax Officer. The will which was executed by the late Gopal Rao was also filed before the officer prior to the completion of these assessment proceedings which is clear from the assessment order of Smt. K. Rajeswari Bai for 1974-75. During the pendency of the assessment relating to the Hindu undivided family, as the karta as well as his wife died, one of the legal heirs was served notice pursuant to which he participated in the proceedings before the assessing authority. Tax liability was determined by the assessing authority and the matter was carried in appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner by the assessee against the assessment order made by the assessing authority for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... challenge the validity of the assessment on the ground that the assessment notices were not served on all other legal representative. Thereafter, the assessee approached this court in W. T. C. Nos. 7 of 1984 and 70 of 1985 under section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act requiring this court to direct the Tribunal for referring the question of law as framed by the assessee while stating the case to this court and thus, these two references have come up before us for consideration. In CIT v. Jai Prakash Singh [1996] 219 ITR 737 (SC) the Supreme Court held thus: "An omission to serve or any defect in the service of notices provided by procedural provisions does not efface or erase the liability to pay tax where such liability is created by di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
