9911796707
TMI Blog1978 (4) TMI 111X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. The assessment was completed on 18th Nov., 1970 determining the total income at Rs. 11,880. Later on, the ITO received information that Smt. Bhagwanti had constructed a property at Malerkotla wherein investment was made to the extent of Rs. 13,560. Proceedings under s. 147 (a) were, therefore, initiated to bring to tax the said sum of Rs. 13,560 because the lady herself did not have any ostensible source of income and the ITO was of the opinion that the investment was made only out of the funds belonging to the HUF. A notice under s. 148 was issued on 15th Jan., 1971 and served on Shri Dogar Mal on 16th Jan., 1971. A return was filed on 11th May, 1971 by Shri Nobat Rai declaring income at Rs. 11,880. This return was filed under protest. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd source of the investment. The appeal was thus dismissed. 4. I have heard the learned representatives of both the parties and have perused the record very carefully. I required the learned Departmental Representative to show me the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment under s. 147(a). The recording of reasons is mandatory as provided under s. 148(2). The learned Departmental Representative produced an order sheet which reads as under:- "Issued notice under s. 148 as per report placed in the complaint file". The aforesaid entry is not signed by the ITO. The learned Departmental Representative referred to the ITO's report dt. 29th July, 1967 to the CIT through the IAC. The IAC's letter dt. 1st Aug., 1967 addressed to the I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In the sale deed itself, the payment of Rs. 6,000 is shown as under: 3-8-59 (date of agreement to sell) 200 3-9-59 1000 20-4-60 500 17-4-62 1000 1-5-62 500 20-3-63 1200 1-4-63 1000 29-5-64 600 . 6000 According to the learned counsel for the assessee, this investment has been accepted as the lady's investment. This fact is not controverted by the learned Departmental Representative. The mere fact that some property stands in the name of Smt. Bhagwanti would not automatically lead to the inference that the investment in the property must be considered as the investment of the HUF. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
