9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (3) TMI 130X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refore, may be sent to the Hon'ble High Court for its opinion by drawing up a statement of the case. However, the ld. counsel for the assessee opposed the submissions on the ground that the decision of the Tribunal is based on the earlier decision which has been accepted by the Revenue and as such there is no case for sending the questions sought in the reference application by the Revenue. He also relied upon the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Pravara Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. vs. CIT (1974) 94 ITR 312 (SC) and contended that this supported the contentions that he had made. 3. After careful considerations of the rival submissions, we are of the opinion that no referable question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out of Karta Jai Parkash's assets and dues in the said firms) for each of the three daughters' marriage expenses. 4. On the above facts, a claim of partial partition was made by an application dt. 30th March, 1965 filed before the ITO concerned. The ITO made an order under s. 171(3) on 10th April, 1969 and accepted the partial partition. Thereafter the assessments were raised with regard to the share coming to the lot of Shri Jai Parkash from the above said three firms in the hands of the respective parties to the extent shown in the memorandum of partition. 5. Shri Jai Parkash's wife Smt. Krishna Kumari expired on 7th Sept., 1967 and her separated share in the above three firms divided in six equal shares on daughter Rekha Kumari and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment Ltd. (1970) 77 ITR 410 (P H). The Tribunal also held that, an overriding title had been created in the instant case by operation of the principles of Hindu Law (as the partition of joint family property, law of inter-state succession to estates of females) as also by acts of the parties, i.e., partial partition effected on 31st March, 1964 and relinquishment of their shares by Indu Kumari and Vina Kumari in the estate of their mother Krishan Kumari". In other words, the assessment in the case of Shri Jai Parkash was upheld only to the extent of share coming to him as per partial partition. This judgment of the Tribunal in ITA No. 771 of 1974-75 dt. 10th Feb., 1975 was accepted by the Revenue. 8. For the asst. yr. 1965-66 which is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h. The revenue tried to justify the action taken by the ITO on the ground that partial partition did not create an overriding, title and, therefore, the assessment with regard to the share coming from the three firms was to be made either in the status of unregistered firm or in the status of association of persons. It justified substantive assessment in the status of association of persons. It justified substantive assessment in the status of unregistered firm and submitted that it is now well settled that a protective assessment can be raised and that has been raised in the status of association of persons. Therefore, the ITO was fully justified in what he did. 11. We find that the AAC cancelled the assessment made in the status of unr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
