9911796707
TMI Blog1967 (7) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess under the name Baij Nath Rameshwar Prasad. During the assessment proceedings for the year 1950-51, in respect of the larger Hindu undivided family an application was made under section 25A(1) for an order that the larger family had been disrupted on May 7, 1950. That application remained pending until March 29, 1956, when an order was made by the Income-tax Officer accepting the claim and recognizing that the larger family had been partitioned on May 7, 1950. The assessee Hindu undivided family did not pay any advance tax under section 18A(3) for the assessment years 1952-53 and 1953-54, the relevant accounting periods being, respectively, the years ending October 30, 1951, and October 17, 1952. The Income-tax Officer made an order unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ply of the said previous year calculated in the manner laid down in sub-section (1), and shall pay the amount, on such of the dates specified in that sub-section as have not expired, by instalments which may be revised according to the proviso to sub-section (2). " It is admitted that the assessee-family did not furnish the estimate contemplated by section 18A(3) and did not pay the instalments of advance tax. Now, the assessee family applied under section 25A for an order on the plea that the larger family had disrupted on May 7, 1950. It is clear that upon its own case the assessee family had come into existence with effect from the said disruption and in respect of the assessment years 1952-53 and 1953-54 was an assessee which had not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... language, but it appears clear to us that it does not contemplate a case where a claim has been made under section 25A(1) and that claim is pending consideration. When an order is made recording that partition took place on a particular date, it is an order under section 25A(1) and in giving effect to that order, the Hindu undivided family will be considered to have been partitioned as from the date recorded in that order. That date in the instant case is May 7, 1950, and it must be held that from that date the assessee-family came into existence. Upon that view of the matter, the provisions of section 18A(3) were clearly attracted. In the circumstances, the question referred to this court must be answered in the negative and against the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
