TMI Blog1996 (3) TMI 96X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 1990, for our opinion : " (1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that there could not be valid assessment in the status of an individual when return of income was filed in the status of the Hindu undivided family ? (2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Income-tax Officer having exercised the option to include in the income of the mother the income of a minor child from the admission of the minor to the benefits of the partnership in a firm, could not include the same income in the income of the father ? " Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the years of assessment are 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1981-82 for the previ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Commissioner of Income-tax. He, therefore, by order dated December 17, 1982, passed under section 263 of the Act set aside the assessments for all these three years with a direction to frame fresh assessments in the status of individual and to include the share income of the minor to his income. The order was appealed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals. The Income-tax Officer, on the basis of the same data, framed a consolidated assessment order for all the three years on March 30, 1985, in the status of individual. He also included the share income of the minor in the income of the assessee which was earlier included in the income of the mother. The assessee felt aggrieved and filed appeals before the Appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... indu undivided family' the first notice issued in the status of individual was illegal and without jurisdiction and the Income-tax Officer could not have validly acted on the return filed by the respondent pursuant to that notice, notwithstanding that it was made in the status of a Hindu undivided family, and any assessment made on such a return would have been invalid. " It is thus, clear that the Tribunal passed the order sustainable in law. Accordingly, we answer both the questions in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Department. This miscellaneous civil case is thus decided in terms indicated above, but without any orders as to costs. Counsel fee for each side is, however, fixed at Rs. 750, if certif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
