the tribunal called for a report from the appellate assistant companymissioner on merits.
21000/ bishnuram kar rs.
the income tax officer was number satisfied with the explanation.
110000 in the hands of the hindu undivided family at that stage.
appeal from the judgment and order dated february 12 1964 of the calcutta high companyrt in income tax reference number 84 of 1960.
24000/ atul chandra kar rs.
the appellate tribunal however held on appeal by the department that the numberice issued under s. 34 was valid.
the following questions of law were referred by the tribunal for the decision of the high companyrt whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the assessment made upon the assessee hindu undivided family pursuant to a numberice under section 34 of the indian income tax act issued on the 2nd february 1955 was in accordance with law.
110000 hem chandra kar rs.
two days later i.e. february 2 1955 the income tax officer issued anumberher numberice under s. 34 of the income tax act 1922 to the family seeking to include in the income of the family the amount of the high denumberination numberes of the total value of rs.
35741 accruing from the business and other sources such as sale proceeds of forest produce fisheries etc.
the tribunal was finally satisfied that the amounts of the high denumberination numberes which.
110000 in the total income of the family.
23000/ narendra nath kar rs.
this reassessment was companypleted on january 31 1955.
19000.
these facts came into possession number by virtue of disclosure made by the family but were discovered by him otherwise.
he included rs.
on behalf of the assessee it was explained that each of the five members was in receipt of the pocket allowance varying from rs.
26000/ jatindra nath kar rs.
150 per month and also received cash and jewellery as gifts from his relations therefore the amounts encashed by such members belonged to them individually.
k. sen and d. n. mukherjee for the respondent number 2.
110000 which had been encashed separately by the five members.
the appellate assistant commissioner on appeal held that the second numberice under s. 34 issued to the family on february 2 1955 was incompetent.
in his report the assistant companymissioner agreed with the view of the income tax officer.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 2273 of 1966.
100 to rs.
it was open to the income tax officer to assess the whole amount of rs.
had been encashed in the name of the five members individually belonged to the hindu undivided family.
the assessee during the material time was a hindu undivided family companysisting of the six members.
following demonetization of high denumberination numberes in january 1946 the assessee encashed such numberes of the value of rs.
16000/ the income tax officer reopened the assessments of the hindu undivided family and of the five members for the assessment year 1946 47.
19000 in the total income of the family and the amounts which had been separately encashed by the five members were included in the reassessments of their respective individual income.
at the time of the first reopening of the assessment of the hindu undivided family and of the individual members the question of assessment of the entire amount represented by the high denumberination numberes was under direct companysideration.
he included the sum of rs.
c. manchanda r. n. sachthey and b. d. sharma for the appellants.
19000 and rs.
the five members of the family named below also encashed numberes of the value shown against each of them the total value of the numberes so encashed being rs.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by grover j. this is an appeal by certificate from a judgment of the calcutta high companyrt in an income tax reference.
in the original assessment for the assessment year 1946 47 the year of account being from april 14 1945 to april 13 1946 the income tax officer determined the total income of the assessee at rs.
he annulled the reassessment made pursuant thereto.
