TMI Blog1976 (11) TMI 11X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... set aside the order of the Commissioner of Agrl. I. T., Madras, dated 11 th October, 1972, suo motu revising the order of the Agrl. ITO, Coimbatore, dated 29th June, 1970, and consequential orders passed in the names of the petitioner, his wife and daughter. The petitioner herein was being assessed on the basis of the composition of the tax up to the assessment year 1969-70 of the extent of 28.28 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er that orders would be passed as HUF at the hands of the petitioner for the entire properties for the period from April 1, 1969, to December 4, 1969, and separately for the period from December 5, 1969, to March 31, 1970, as individuals on the composition applications filed by them and subsequently he passed orders on these composition applications also. The Commr. of Agrl. I. T., after issue of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld not have accepted or recognised the said partition. Apart from this, the Commr. of Agrl. I. T. also pointed out that the question of recognising or accepting the partition will arise only in making an assessment under s. 17 of the Act and not in connection with the collection of tax on the basis of composition. Section 29(1) of the Act is clear and states : " Where at the time of making an a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... UF and consequently the question of recognising any alleged partition did not arise. Therefore, looked at from any point of view, the order of the Agrl. ITO was utterly untenable and the Commr. of Agrl. I. T. was fully justified in setting aside that order and the consequential orders. The result is the tax revision case fails and is dismissed with costs. Counsel's fee Rs. 250. - - Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
