TMI Blog1995 (10) TMI 32X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate Tribunal was right in law in accepting the genuineness of the entity styled as Sh. P. N. Beri and Sons (HUF) created by the legal heirs of Sh. P. N. Beri after his death and the death of his father, Sh. K. R. Beri ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in directing to make the assessment of income in the status of HUF on substantive basis ?" In view of the similarity of the points raised in all the four petitions, we are deciding them by one order. Reference to some of the facts, common to all the cases is necessary for the purpose of deciding whether any question of law deserves to be referred to this court. The assessee, P. N. Beri and Sons (HUF), filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oceeded to make a protective assessment by passing an order. Similar orders came to be passed by the Assessing Officer for all the assessment years to which reference has been made hereinabove. The appeals filed by the non-petitioners were allowed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The appellate authority held that the appellant, non-petitioner herein, has been assessed to tax in the status of an HUF ever since 1977-78 to 1984-85 on substantive basis and these assessments were still operative. The appellate authority further held that the subsequent decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cannot be of any consequence. The appellate authority concluded that P. N. Beri and Sons genuinely constituted an HUF and, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onstitution of three partners with specified shares represented by their respective HUF, kartas and adult members. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) further noted that the assessment orders in the case of three HUFs for the assessment year 1983-84 showed that all the three HUFs which constituted the firm were genuine HUFs who were being assessed regularly to tax. These three HUFs through their kartas and adult members entered into a partnership which was quite in order. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) furtheiheld that the Assessing Officer did not bring any material on record to establish his reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of McDowell and Co. Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148 ; [1985] 59 STC 277 (SC). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|