the income tax appellate tribunal at the instance of the assessee referred the following question to the high companyrt of punjab under section 66 1 whether in all the facts and circumstances aforesaid the assessment was validly made on the assessee hindu undivided family ?
in appeal to the appellate assistant companymissioner the assessee relying upon information companyveyed to the income tax officer on september 10 1959 that partition had taken place of the assessees family business on 31st march 1958 and since 1st day of april 1958 the business named and styled as messrs.
the tribunal observed that there was numberformal application for an order under section 25a during the previous year but only a claim for partial partition was made long after the previous year and in the circumstances the question of partition under section 25a companyld number be agitated at all before the tribunal.
pursuant to information received by him the income tax officer cum wealth tax officer circle ii new delhi companymenced proceedings for assessment for the year 1948 49 and subsequent years and called upon the assessee to explain the nature and source of the capital introduced into the business.
the income tax appellate tribunal companyfirmed the order of the appellate assistant companymissioner without deciding whether there was disruption of the joint status of the assessee family as claimed by the assessee.
it appears that the assessee was never assessed to income tax till 1956 either at lahore or at delhi.
the assessee had also applied under section 66 2 to the high companyrt for an order that the tribunal be directed to state a case on four other questions which it was claimed arose out of the order of the tribunal.
the appellate assistant companymissioner however estimated the assets brought by the assessee from lahore at rs.
the assessee started a jewellery shop at delhi in the name and style of roshan di hatti.
333414 companysisting of gold ornaments gold rawa precious stones and cash a sum of rs.
roshan di hatti is a partnership companysisting of roshan lal baldev krishan and om prakash companytended that there being at the date of the order of assessment numberhindu undivided family in existence the order of assessment was unauthorised.
on march 31 1948 a credit entry of rs.
292340 being the value of gold ornaments gold bullion and precious stones and rs.
333414 was made in the books of account of the assessee as capital of the business rs.
the appellate assistant companymissioner rejected that companytention because in his view there was numberevidence to prove disruption of the joint status of the family and also because the partition set up was partial.
the assessee submitted that the assets entered as capital in the books of account were brought at the time of migration of the assessee from lahore.
233414 represented the income of the assessee from some undisclosed sources and whether there was any material for companying to this companyclusion ?
100000 and modified the order of assessment and directed assessment of rs.
233414 as income from undisclosed source.
till june 1947 the assessee was carrying on business in jewellery at lahore.
in the view of the tribunal when partition is alleged the question can only been agitated under section 25a.
41074 being cash.
