9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (9) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The assessment year is 1978-79 and the relevant previous year on 31 statement March,1978. 3. The assessee had filed her return of income showing Rs. 31,800 as income from contract business. The assessees husband was also carrying on contract business since last many years in his individual capacity. The assessee started her business under the name and style of M/s Nagarmal Goel which incidenta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the business of her husband in his individual capacity and, therefore, the income earned by the assessee should be assessed in his hands. Since the assessee had filed her return of income, the ITO framed an assessment on 7th March 1981 in the case of the assessee on protective basis on a total income of Rs. 45,490 which included Rs. 13,100 being the loans alleged to have been taken by the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Being aggrieved by the order of the AAC, the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal, wherein inter alia, she has taken up a point that the assessment made in her hand should have been treated as a regular assessment. The ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently argues that the AAC was not justified in not accepting the assessee's contention that the assessment made in her hand should b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orities and submitted that it would be premature to accept the assessee's submission regarding the nature of assessment made in her hands, when the ITO has already taken action u/s 148 of the Act in the case of the assessee's husband. Relying on the decision in the case of Lalji Hari Das as well as in the case of Jagannath Hanuman Bux vs. ITO (1957) 31 ITR 603 (Cal), the ld. Rep. for the departmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal and restore the case once more to his file with a direction to give his decision afresh on all the points, after ascertaining the facts of the action taken by the ITO in the case of the assessee's husband, and after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee in this regard. 7. In view of the aforesaid decision taken by us, we did not call upon the parties to argue on the merits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
