2005 (3) TMI 53 - HC - Income Tax

Reassessment notice - Case of the assessee is that since the notice of reassessment under section 148 was issued to the assessee in the status of an individual and hence, any assessment made in the capacity of Hindu undivided family i.e., the impugned assessment is bad in law, without jurisdiction and non est in law. It is contended that when the notice is issued in the name of individual, no assessment can be made in the case of Hindu undivided family it being an altogether different entity in the eye of law as against an individual - It is thus contended that this argument was rightly accepted by the Tribunal in favour of the assessee for annulling the assessment it cannot be said that the assessment made is without jurisdiction. It was a clear case of mistake which was rectified to the full knowledge of the assessee to which they themselves replied and submitted to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer pursuant to proper notice issued under section 148 contention of assessee not acceptable case is decided in favour of revenue

Summary

Issues:
1. Annulling the assessment justification.
2. Validity of the return filed by the assessee as Hindu undivided family.

Analysis:
1. The first issue revolves around the justification of annulling the assessment. The assessee argued that since the notice of reassessment was issued in the name of an individual, any assessment made in the capacity of Hindu undivided family was invalid. The Tribunal accepted this argument, annulling the assessment. However, the High Court disagreed, stating that the assessee had initially filed the return as a Hindu undivided family and later requested the Assessing Officer to treat it as such. The Court found that the notice issued was rectified, and the assessee submitted to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer, thereby validating the assessment.

2. The second issue pertains to the validity of the return filed by the assessee as a Hindu undivided family. The assessee contended that the notice sent to the individual could not be used for the Hindu undivided family assessment. The Court acknowledged the legal distinction between individual and Hindu undivided family for tax purposes but found that in this case, the assessee had voluntarily filed the return as a Hindu undivided family and later confirmed this status in correspondence with the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the Court rejected the argument that the notice was defective and upheld the validity of the assessment.

In conclusion, the High Court ruled in favor of the Commissioner of Income-tax and against the assessee on both issues, emphasizing that the assessment was valid based on the rectification of the notice and the subsequent submission by the assessee. The Court clarified that while the legal distinction between individual and Hindu undivided family is recognized, the specific circumstances of this case validated the assessment made by the Assessing Officer.