1,06,156 also as income of a Hindu undivided family and liable to tax in the hands of Hirday Narain by the application of s. 16 3 a ii of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922.
Hirday Narain then applied for rectification of a mistake in the order of assessment which he claimed was apparent from the record.
226 of the Constitution challenge in the order of the Income tax Officer.
It is therefore requested that such of the income as has by mistake been included in the, assessment of the Hindu undivided family for the said year under s. 16 3 a ii may kindly be excluded under s. 35 as the mistake is apparent from record.
The Income tax Officer accepted the plea that to income assessed to tax in the hands of Hirday Narain in the status of a Hindu undivided family s. 16 3 a ii of the Income tax Act, 1922, did number apply, but he declined to give relief holding that for the period November 19, 1949 to September 30, 1950 Hirday Narain should have been assessed as an individual.
Section 16 3 a ii does number apply to cases of Hindu undivided family, but only to those of Individuals.
With special leave, Hirday Narain has appealed to this Court.
On November 19, 1949 the property of the joint family was partitioned between Hirday Narain and his.
Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated the September 19, 1968 of the Allahabad High Court in Second Appeals Nos.
In respect of the period November 10, 1949 to September 30, 1950 the income was assessed in the hands of Hirday Narain in the status of a Hindu undivided family.
193 and 448 of 1970.
Hirday Narain then moved a petition before the High Court of Allahabad under Art.
P. Goyal, S. M. Jain and S. P. Singh, for the appellant in both the appeals .
Jagadish Swarup, Solicitor General, Gobind Das, R. N. Sach they and B. D. Sharma, for the respondent in both the appeals .
12 and 13 of 1962.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
18,520 as income of the Hindu undivided family of Hirday Narain and his five sons and 2 assessing Rs.
He submitted that the assessment of Hirday Narain has been made in the status of undivided family companyprising of himself and his minor son Satendra Prakash.
In appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner treated Rs.
The companyresponding previous years for the assessment years were October 1, 1949 to September 30, 1950 and October 1, 1950 to September 30, 1951.
In assessing the income for the assessment year 195152 the Income tax Officer recorded an order that the property was partitioned, but he still assessed the income received by Hirday Narain as income of a Hindu undivided family.
Pursuant to that order, the Income tax Officer made two orders of assessment I assessing Rs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. These appeals arise out of orders passed in peti tions praying for a writ of mandamus to rectify orders of assessment relating to income assessed to tax for the years 1951 52 and 1952 53.
18,520 earned between October 1, 1949 and November 18, 1949 as income of the former Hindu undivided family and directed that it be excluded from the assessment.
Till the assessment year 1950 51 the income received by HirdayNarain was assessed to tax as the income of a Hindu undividedfamily.
Hirday Narain and his five sons were members of a Hindu undivided family.
