TMI Blog1998 (2) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Rule No. 2228 of 1993 is taken up for discussion. For the assessment year 1985-86, the petitioner submitted his return through his father and natural guardian, Shri Mahesh Kr. Saharia, as on the date when the return was filed, the petitioner was a minor. The assessment was duly completed by the Income-tax Officer, Ward-D. The petitioner was duly informed about the completion of assessment vide letter dated February 29, 1993, and Rs. 1,986 was determined as refundable to the petitioner. After the completion of the assessment for the year 1985-86, the petitioner was served with a letter dated March 9/16, 1993, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle Dibrugarh, proposing to reopen the assessment for the years 1985-86 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case and as such inclusion of income of the trust in the individual return of the minor as proposed in the said letter dated March 9/16, 1993, bears no legal sanction. It was also submitted that the petitioner who was the minor individual and the specific trust were two different assessees and thereby permissible deduction and rebate were correctly claimed in the return. In the said letter, it was submitted that in view of the above, the proposed proceedings under section 147 of the Act should not be initiated in the case of the petitioner. The Income-tax Officer, respondent No. 3, vide notice dated March 31, 1993, issued under section 148 of the Act proposed to reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year 1985-86 on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted returns on behalf of the trust. It is relevant to mention that the whole trust was for the benefit of one person, Shri Anant Kumar Saharia, and the representative assessee for the minor and the trust was the same person, Shri Mahesh Kumar Saharia, the father of the minor and the trustee of the said trust. The income as individual and income from trust which accrued to the same person, the minor Shri Anant Kumar Saharia, was known to the representative assessee, Shri Mahesh Kumar Saharia. The respondents further submitted that the assessment for the assessment year 1988-89 in respect of the return of income of Sri Anant Kumar Saharia submitted by Shri Mahesh Kumar Saharia, father and natural guardian of Shri Anant Kumar Saharia, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact that the income arising to the person being the same such deductions are not admissible beyond the maximum limit of Rs. 7,000 under section 80L. It was further stated that it was incumbent on the part of the representative assessee to disclose and/or mention in the return the other income or benefit from other sources of the assessee. This non-disclosure had caused escapement of assessment as the income of the beneficiary of the trust could not be taken together with the income of the minor as individual; and also by way of claim of excessive deduction or relief in the return. As such the Assessing Officer issued notice to show cause as to why the assessment for the years 1985-86 to 1991-92 should not be reopened. It was also mentione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e-tax escaped from taxation and the income of the said minor, as individual, came to Rs. 21,140 after deduction of Rs. 29 under section 80L got deduction under section 80L more than the permissible limit and also got the benefit of maximum amount of income not chargeable to income-tax twice and as a result income chargeable to income-tax escaped assessment for that assessment year. In other words, in the return of income submitted in the status of individual, the beneficial interest in the trust was not disclosed in respect of the petitioner and vice versa in the return submitted in respect of the trust, the petitioner's income other than the beneficial interest in the trust had not been disclosed. Dr. A. K. Saraf, learned counsel for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmit its return disclosing fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment. The assessee was duty bound under the law to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment year. Mr. Joshi further submitted that the authority at all relevant times acted lawfully and, therefore, the question of interference by this court at this stage does not arise. The power conferred under section 147 is no doubt very wide. But at the same time it cannot be stated to be a plenary power. The assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, therefore, must be on existence of materials before the authority. It will not depend on the mere whim or fancy of the Assessing Officer. The existence of the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
