9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (1) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to as the Act, for an extent of 26.43 ordinary acres from 1972-73 onwards under composition application basis. Subsequently, in 1977, the first respondent, on the premises that certain landed properties enjoyed commonly by the petitioner, his wife and his sons were omitted to be assessed at the hands of the petitioner, took action under S. 65A(3) read with s. 9(2) of the Act and issued a show-cau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red deed in the family and thereafter the extents acquired under the partition by the different sharers are being enjoyed by them separately and even otherwise if the petitioner has been managing such extents, it would not amount to holding or enjoyment by an association of individuals, within the meaning of the Act. The factum of the partition is not being disputed by the respondents. The second ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ir common benefit and the mere fact that all of them had appointed the same person as manager or given the lands on lease to the same person and the manager or lessee was jointly cultivating all the lands would not make the owners liable to be assessed as an " association of individuals ". In the present case, apart from the properties allocated to the different sharers in the partition of 1959, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Income-tax Act, 1955." The tests laid down in the above decisions do not stand satisfied in the instant case. Further, one of the sons has been assessed in his individual capacity. An assessment having been made individually on one of the members of the erstwhile family, it is no longer possible to treat the members of the family as a single unit and pass an assessment order on the basis of " ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
