The assessee companytended that the proceedings were irregular and that he was number liable to pay anything.
AIR 1953 SC 429 The Judgment was delivered by KANIA, C. J. KANIA, C. J. This is an appeal from a judgment of the High Court at Patna.
His companytention was rejected by the Income tax Officer, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and the Income tax Appellate Tribunal.
Accordingly the Income tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following question for the High Courts opinion Whether in the circumstances of this case proceedings under section 34 in respect of the assessment year 1939 40 were validly initiated and companypleted against the Hindu undivided family, which had ceased to exist then, and an order under section 25A 1 accepting the partition of the Hindu undivided family had already been passed.
He prayed that a question of law may be referred to the High Court for its opinion.
The numberice was to require payment of the full amount of tax due on the escaped income and did number apportion the liability for it amongst the three members of the family.
Thereafter, the Income tax Officer made an assessment on the escaped income of Rs.
The Income tax Officer issued a numberice in the name of the joint Hindu family and served it on the appellant under section 34 read with section 22 of the Income tax Act to make a return in respect of the escaped income and the appellant sent a return in response to that numberice.
37,098 and issued a numberice of demand on the appellant as the karta and on the two other members of the joint family.
