Law:

Section:

Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment year 1985-86 - Three assessments were made, one regular and two protective, by including same income in all cases - One was on assessee's husband in his individual capacity, another in name of assessee's husband as karta of joint family and third on assessee - Question that arose in all assessments was assessability of an amount found at time of search which represented money advanced in a promissory note standing in name of assessee - On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) held that said amount had come out of agricultural income of HUF - Tribunal set aside order of Commissioner (Appeals) and held that on basis of statement of assessee and her husband at time of search, money advanced belonged to assessee and should be assessed in her hands - Moreover, no details relating to agricultural income were given by HUF - Assessee made application under section 254(2) for rectification of mistake in order of Tribunal - Whether finding of Tribunal that HUF did not give details about nature of crops and fact that extent of income shown against extent of lands appeared to be disproportionate, did not give rise to a mistake apparent from record as more than one view was possible - Held, yes - Whether Tribunal was right in law in declining to remand matter for affording an opportunity to applicant to prove source of income since prayer for remand had not been made at time of passing of original order and no further step had been taken against original order by filing a reference application - Held, yes FACTS Three assessments were made, one on the assessee's husband in his individual capacity (on regular basis), another in the name of the assessee's husband as karta of the joint family (protective assessment) and the third on the assessee (protective assessment). Question that arose in all assessments was assessability of an amount found at the time of search representing money advanced in a promissory note standing in the name of assessee. The same amount was included in all the three assessments. On appeals, the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) held in the case of HUF that said amount had come…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492