TMI Blog1982 (6) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hare profits from the firm of M/s Mool Raj Sondhi Sons. His minor sons Anuj Kumar and Amit Kumar were admitted to the benefits of partnership in the firm working under the name and style of M/.s R.B. Sondhi Co Yamuna Nagar. Both the firms were located at Yamuna Nagar. The assessee filed the return for the asst yr. 1976-77 and the assessment on the basis of that return was completed u/s 143(1) on a total income of Rs.32,860 on 18-1-1979 the previous year followed by the assessee for the purpose of income tax assessment and the previous year followed by the firm of M/s R.B. Sondhi Co was the calendar year which for the assessment year under appeal was the calendar year 1975 in the Original return filed by the assessee the share of profi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... possession of the ITO was at the behest of the revenue audit party and apparently they had referred to the two judgements to which a reference has been made in the order of the AAC the ITO however has tied to justify the reopening of the assessment on the ground that subsequently on examination of records it is discovered by him that they my predecessor had committed an error in not including the income of S/Shri Anuj Kumar and Amit Kumar minor sons of the assessee from 1-1-1975 to 30-9-1975 firm the firm M.s R.B. Sondhi Co Yamuna Nagar in the hands of the assessee. 4. He reopened the assessment and completed it on 29-07-1980 by including Rs. 23,514 into the total income of the assessee being the sum total of the share of the minor son ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 982) 134 ITR 355 (Guj); and (iii) CIT Bombay City III v. H.D. Dennis Ors (1982) 26 CTR (Bom) 107 :(1982) 135 ITR 1 (Bom) 6. The revenue opposed these submissions and conteded that the reassessment proceedings by the ITO were fully justified because the audit party had merely pointed out to the ITO the source of the law contained in the two judgements and the ITO had further determined the profit falling to the share of the minors form the firm of M/s R.B. Sondhi Co to which they were admitted to the partnership He was therefore, justified in reopening the assessments. 7. In the rejoinder the Id counsel for the assessee submitted that the information communicated by the revenue audit party was its opinion as to the applicability ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roposition in the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kalyanji mavji Co 1976 CTR (SC) 85 : (1976) 102 ITR 287 (SC) to the effect that a chase where income had escaped assessment due to oversight inadvertence or mistake of the ITO must fall within s.34 (1)(b) of the IT Act 1922 is stated too widely and travels farther than the statue warrants in so far as it can be said to lay down that if on reappraising the material considered by him during the original assessment the ITO discovers that he has committed an error in consequence of which income has escaped assessment it is open to him to reopen the assessment. An error discovered on a reconsideratrion of the same material does not give him that power this is exactly what the ITO h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
