9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act to Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) as assessee and period of limitation for issuance of such notice.
Summary: The judgment of the court dealt with the validity of a notice issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act to a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) as the assessee and the period of limitation for such notice. The case involved the acquisition of land belonging to a HUF, with compensation and interest paid in 1954-55. The notice for reopening the assessment was issued in 1967 to the individual karta of the family, without reference to the HUF. The Income Tax authorities later sought to clarify that the return should be submitted as the karta of the joint family. The Tribunal held that the notice was invalid as it did not go to the real assessee, the HUF. The department's appeal was dismissed, and the Tribunal declined to refer questions to the High Court, citing a Supreme Court decision that allowed rejection of reference applications if the question of law was academic or already decided by the highest court. The court noted that the notice issued in 1967 did not mention the HUF, which was the real assessee, and the clarification came after the extended period of limitation had expired. The court emphasized that the status of the assessee was crucial, and in this case, the HUF was the assessee, not the individual karta. Referring to a Calcutta High Court decision, the court highlighted the importance of correctly describing the status of the assessee in the notice u/s 148. The court also mentioned a Supreme Court decision that allowed the Tribunal to reject reference applications if the question of law was academic or already decided by the highest court. Ultimately, the court dismissed the income-tax cases without costs.
|
