9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (8) TMI 42X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), for the opinion to this court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in taking the view that reopening of the assessment by the Income-tax Officer was not legal or permissible?" The present reference relates to the assessment year 1973-74. The respondent-assessee is a part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gistered firm, M/s. Vijay Picture Palace, wherein his wife, Smt. Lalita Devi is also a partner. As such, the income of the assessee's wife Smt. Lalita Devi, should have handled in the hands of Shri Indu Kumar Tekriwal as individual, under section 64 of the Income-tax Act, which has escaped assessment. Issue notice under section 148 at once." In response to the notice issued under section 148 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... share income of the spouse under section 64(1)(i) of the Act. The assessee carried the matter in the appeal. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, however, dismissed the appeal by observing that after the decision of this court in the case of Madho Prasad v. CIT [1978] 112 ITR 492, the Income-tax Officer had reopened the assessment, although this fact has not been mentioned either in the assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted that it is not necessary to go into the merits of the reopening of the assessment proceedings inasmuch as the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Shri Om Prakash [1996] 217 ITR 785 has already overruled the decision of this court in the case of Madho Prasad [1978] 112 ITR 492. The hon'ble Supreme Court has held that for section 64(1) of the Act to get attracted it is necessary that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
