Case Details

Citation(s)
1963 SLG 305 1963 SLD 305 (1963) 49 ITR 70 (1963) 8 TAX 50
Supreme Court of India
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 214 AND 215 OF 1958, DECEMBER 12, 1962
S.K. DAS, J.L. KAPUR, A.K. SARKAR M. HIDAYATULLAH AND RAGHUBAR DAYAL, JJ
K.N. Rajagopal Sastri and P.D. Menon for the Appellants. S.P. Varma for the
Respondent

Commissioner of INCOME TAX

v.

Sardar Lakhmir Singh

Law: Income Tax Act, 1922

Section: 34(3)

Section 153 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 34(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922], read with section 31 of the Indian Income-tax (Amendment) Act, 1953 - Assessment - Time limit for completion of - Assessment years 1946-47 and 1947-48 - Whether second proviso to section 34(3) of 1922 Act, as amended by the Amending Act of 1953, in so far as it affects persons other than assessees is void as violating article 14 of Constitution - Held, yes - Assessment for assessment years in question were completed on 15-3-1951 in status of HUF - AAC set aside assessment holding that assessments in question should have been completed in status of individual members of family - Accordingly on 27-11-1953 ITO passed assessment order in status of individual members of said HUF - Whether, on facts, assessments completed were barred by limitation prescribed under section 34(3) of 1922 Act - Held, yes - Whether since in proceedings under section 31 of Amending Act of 1953 in consequence of which assessment order against respondent was made, assessee was respondent's father as karta of non-existent family and not respondent, provisions of section 31 of Amending Act was invalid against respondent - Held, yes FACTS The respondent was son of one 'S' upto the year 1944-45, the 'S' and the respondent, were being assessed as an HUF. For the assessment year 1945-46, 'S' and the respondent filed two separate returns and made a claim under section 25A of the 1922 Act which was rejected and the father and son were assessed as a Hindu undivided family but there was a protective assessment upon the respondent as an individual. On appeal, the Tribunal held that the incomes of 'S' and the respondent were not the income of a Hindu undivided family but their individual incomes and thus he set aside the assessment of the Hindu undivided family. For the assessment year 1946-47, three returns were filed (1) by respondent, in regard to his separate income, (2) by 'S' also in his individual capacity and the third under protest by 'S' as the karta of Hindu undivided family. On 15-3-1951, the ITO assessed the total income of 'S' and the respondent as the income of the Hindu undivided…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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