9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (12) TMI 83X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s an individual, the income from business has been shown. 2. But the ITO in the case of the individual observed that since in the case of the HUF it was held that the property belonged to Shri K.N. Gupta in his individual capacity and did not pertain to his alleged HUF constituted of self, wife and the minor children. For that the ITO noted his observations in the HUF assessment as under: "The plot of land was purchased for Rs. 16,000 on 23rd Oct., 70 in the joint names of the assessee K.N. Gupta and his wife Smt. Shanti Gupta. The source of this investment is said to be sale proceeds of family ornaments by assessee's father Shri P.D. Gupta. The plan for the house sanctioned on 8th May,., 1971. It is stated that the construction of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated certificate is said to be in the hand writing of late P.D. Gupta filed stating that he paid Rs. 10,000 to K.N. Gupta from his own earning during the year 1972-73 in instalments for the construction of the house. Copy of the drawing amounts in the books of M/s. Agro Chemicals and Pesticides during the year 1971-72 and 1972-73 has been filed. A copy of statement of Permeshwari Dayal Gupta said to have been recovered before his death has been filed. Shri P.D. Gupta states in this statement that he has purchased a plot of land for Rs. 16,000. This sum is said to have been collected by P.D. Gupta out of sale proceeds of his wife's ornaments. He also states in this statement to have further invested a sum of Rs. 25,000 from his own earnings. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the status of HUF without prejudice of the action regarding this be taken against Shri K.N. Gupta in his individual capacity." 3. Thus, ultimately, the ITO added back the income from property into the individual asst. of the assessee for both the years under consideration. 4. In appeal, the AAC endorsed the findings given by the ITO and dismissed both the appeals filed by the assessee. Hence, these appeals before us. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the assessee Shri M.H. Singhal and the learned authorised representative of the Department Shri Sheo Prasad. In this case, we have noted that the assessee has not challenged the findings given by the ITO in respect of his HUF assessment. Thus, if the assessment in the case of HUF has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
