9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Analysis: The judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad-A, involved a dispute regarding the initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appellant, an individual engaged in the business of selling empty tins, did not file his return of income for the assessment year 1976-77, claiming no taxable income. However, upon discovering that the appellant's minor son was a partner in a firm and had a share of profit, the Income Tax Officer (ITO) issued a notice under section 148 of the Act, prompting the appellant to file his return of income. The ITO estimated the business income at Rs. 5,000 and clubbed the minor son's share of profit with the appellant's income under section 64 of the Act. The appellant challenged this before the Appellate Authority Commissioner (AAC) and subsequently before the Tribunal, arguing that since his total income was only Rs. 1,800, he was not obligated to disclose the minor son's share of profit. The department, however, supported the actions of the income-tax authorities, citing a Supreme Court decision that emphasized the obligation to disclose the minor's share of profit regardless of the appellant's income level. The Tribunal carefully considered the arguments presented by both parties and found no merit in the appellant's contentions. It relied on the Supreme Court decision and the provisions of the Income-tax Act to conclude that the appellant was indeed required to disclose the minor son's share of profit in his return of income, irrespective of his own income being below or above the taxable limit. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the order of the AAC, dismissing the appeal brought by the appellant. In summary, the judgment highlights the importance of complying with the disclosure requirements under the Income-tax Act, emphasizing that the obligation to report certain income, such as a minor child's share of profit, exists regardless of the taxpayer's overall income level. The decision underscores the legal principle that specific provisions of the Act must be followed, even if they may lead to additional tax liabilities for the taxpayer.
|
