9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (2) TMI 121X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntly, these assessments were reopened and the status has been taken as HUF (specified). In the assessment year 1981-82 the status of the assessee was taken as HUF (specified) in the assessment made under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that his wife Smt. V. Rajyalakshmi relinquished her right in the property on 25-6-1974 on receiving Rs. 10,000 for maintenance and the suit filed on behalf of the minor son for partition has been decreed. On appeals, those assessments were upheld. 3. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that Smt. V. Rajyalakshmi relinquished her right in the property on 25-6-1974 on receipt of a maintenance of Rs. 10,000 and the suit filed on behalf of the minor, son for partitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her the Hindu undivided family has at least one member whose net wealth assessable for the assessment year exceeds Rs. 1 lakh? If the reply to this question is in the negative, please attach declarations to this effect from all members of the Hindu undivided family." Similarly in the income-tax return the clause in the return reads as under : "In the case of Hindu undivided family,--- Whether the family has at least one member whose total income assessable for the assessment year exceeds the maximum amount which is not chargeable to income-tax? If the reply to this question is in the negative, please attach declarations from all the members of the Hindu undivided family." There is no provision either in the Income-tax Act or the Wea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rse of the assessment proceedings for 1981-82 it was noticed that the correct status was that of HUF (specified). But we find that the assessment for 1981-82 was completed on 15-12-1983 whereas the reasons for reopening the assessment for 1978-79 have been recorded on 25-3-1983. Hence, that reason itself is not a valid one. Thus, the reopening of the assessment for 1978-79 under the Income-tax Act as well as the Wealth-tax Act is not valid. On merits also we have held that the revenue is not justified in taking the status as HUF (specified) and the correct status is only ordinary HUF. The contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that once wife has relinquished her rights in the property having taken maintenance is no longer a memb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
