The present assessee is a branch of a bigger Hindu undivided family known as Nathu Ram Jawahar Lal, Jhansi.
The High Court referred to the provisions of Section 34 3 and was of the view that since the order was passed by the Tribunal giving direction, the bar or limitation was lifted and the assessments companyld be made without any bar or limitation.
The High Court, on the basis of these decisions, was of the view that assessments companyld be made on the basis of voluntary returns already filed by the assessee.
There were originally four appeals for the assessment years 1946 47, 1947 48, 1948 49 and 1949 50.
On March 30, 1960, the High Court quashed the assessment orders on the ground that as voluntary returns filed by the assessee were pending, numberproceeding companyld be taken under Section 34 of the Act, 1922.
The Tribunal in the instant appeal out of which the reference was made to the High Court and out of which these appeals arise, after discussing the relevant facts and the provisions of law companyfirmed the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and dismissed the appeals.
It appears that on 28th October, 1950, relating to the assessment years 1946 47 to 1949 50 in case of bigger Hindu undivided family, M s Nathu Ram Jawaharlal, Jhansi, order was passed by the Tribunal in the appeal relating to the assessments pending before it.
Appeal by Special leave from the Judgment and Order dated the 3rd January, 1973 of the Allahabad High Court in I. T. Ref.
It should be numbered that originally on the basis that the bigger H.U.F. had number been disrupted assessments for these years had been made and appeals relating to those assessments were pending before the Tribunal.
The said U.F. thereafter, filed appeals to the Appellate Tribunal in respect of the order under claim of partition under Section 25A of 1922 Act which by its order dated 31st August, 1954 accepted the claim under Section 25A of 1922 Act, and the Tribunal passed orders on that basis in the appeals relating to the assessment orders in respect of the bigger H.U.F. on 28th October, 1954.
The assessee again filed a writ petition praying for quashing the proceedings on the ground that revenue companyld number proceed against it on the basis of the voluntary returns.
The assessee appealed against these assessments to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income tax, but before the appeals were taken up for hearing, the assessee moved the High Court of Allahabad under Article 226 of the Constitution.
The assessees objection regarding the validity of the assessments being made under Section 34 on merits as well as on the point that time for making the assessment under Section 34 had already expired, were rejected by the Income tax Officer.
The bigger Hindu undivided family of M s Nathu Ram Jawahar Lal was partitioned on 19th May, 1945, and the present assessee along with another smaller H.U.F. came into existence and the said bigger H.U.F. had made a claim in respect of the partition under Section 25A of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922.
The Tribunal disposed of these appeals by the order dated 28th October, 1954 and the Tribunal in the said order had observed, inter alia, as follows The assessments for those years were have necessarily to be set aside with the direction that fresh assessments should be made, one for the period 19.5.1945 upto which the Hindu undivided family was in existence and the others on the companyponent Hindu undivided families, namely M s Jawaharlal Mani Ram and Bhagwan Das Sita Ram.
1168 69 NT of 1973.
The said claim of partition by the bigger H.U.F. was rejected by the Income tax Officer and also by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
The assessee was successful in the Writ and, therefore, the appellate orders were quashed by the High Court.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
The matter came up before a Division Bench of the High Court and as there was a previous bench decision of that Court in the case of Sool Chand Ram Sewak v. Commissioner of Income tax, U.P. which supported the revenues case and as the division bench before whom this case came was unable to accept that view, the division bench referred the case to a larger Bench.
The point before the Tribunal was whether valid assessments companyld be made for the assessment years under companysideration on 31st May, 1962 on the basis of the returns filed under Section 22 1 of the Act of 1922 on 18th November, 1950.
The returns originally filed were under Section 22 1 and were filed on 18th November, 1950.
Seth J. however, was in favour of assessee.
Thereafter the Income tax Officer initiated proceedings on the basis of the voluntary returns.
This reference thereafter came before a Full Bench companysisting of Gulati, H. N. Seth C.S.P. Singh, JJ.
450 of 1965.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J. These appeals by certificate granted by the High Court of Allahabad under Section 66A 2 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, arise out of judgment delivered and order passed on 3rd January, 1973 by the High Court of Allahabad in Income tax Reference No.
answered the question in the affirmative in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.
T. Desai, B.B. Ahuja and Miss A. Subhashini for the Respondent.
As the appeals for the assessment years 1946 47 and 1947 48 were withdrawn by the revenue, we are number companycerned with appeals for the assessment years 1948 49 and 1949 50.
Gulati and C. S. P. Singh, JJ.
He, therefore, companypleted the assessments on 8.9.1955 under Section 23 3 read with Section 34 of the Income tax Act, 1922.
In view of the majority the question was answered in favour of the revenue and in affirmative.
The present assessee filed fresh returns of income on 12.4.1955 in response to numberices under Section 34 of 1922 Act.
The assessee companyld number get any decision in his favour either from the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or from the Tribunal and being aggrieved by these orders, filed a Writ Petition to the High Court of Allahabad challenging the validity of the Appellate orders.
The Income tax Officer, thereafter, initiated proceedings under Section 34 of the Income tax Act of 1922 for assessing the smaller Hindu undivided family, the present assessee in view of the fact that the claim for disruption of the bigger H. U. F. had been accepted by the Tribunal.
The following question of law had been referred to the High Court for companysideration under Section 66 1 of the Income Tax Act, 1922 by the Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, valid assessments companyld be made on 31st May, 1962, for the assessment years 1948 49 and 1949 50 on the basis of voluntary returns of income filed under Section 22 1 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 on 18.11.1950?
Reference was made to the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income tax Bombay City II v. Ranchhoddass Karsondas, and in the case of Estate of the late A.M.K.M. Karuppan Chettiar v. Commissioner of Income tax, Madras and Commissioner of Income tax Madras v. M.K.K.R. Muthukaruppan Chettiar.
C. Manchanda and M. J.P. Malhotra for the Appellant.
The revenue having failed in its attempt to companyplete the assessees assessments under Section 34, made another attempt to assess the assessee on the basis of the voluntary returns originally filed by the assessee on 18.11.1950 by relying upon the order of the Tribunal dated 28.10.1954 and invoking the provisions of 2nd proviso to Section 34 3 .
450 of 1969.
The Appellate Assistant Commissioner by his order held that numbervalid assessments companyld be made on 31st May, 1962.
The said assessments which were companypleted on 31st May, 1962 were the subject matters of appeals before the Tribunal.
This petition was rejected by the High Court and thereafter the Income tax Officer proceeded to companyplete the assessments under Section 23 3 and passed assessment orders on 31st May, 1962, in respect of the four years.
While this claim was pending the present assessee filed voluntary returns under Section 22 1 of the Act for the assessment years 1946 47 to 1949 50 on 10th November, 1950.
As mentioned hereinbefore after the Tribunal had directed the assessments should be made on the companyponent units of the bigger Hindu undivided family, after partition was accepted, namely, the assessee and Jawaharlal Mani Ram, the Income tax Officer instead of proceeding on the basis of the voluntary returns already filed by the assessee proceeded to take action under Section 34 1 b of the Act of 1922 and companypleted the assessments for all the four years on September 8,1955.
