SELLAMMAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is filed by the plaintiffs in Q.S. No. 225 of 1970, on the file of the Subordinate Judge of Salem, challenging the legality and correctness of the concurrent findings of the courts below.

(2.) THE facts of the case are briefly as follows : One KNPP Narayanasami Chettiar, the husband of the first appellant and father of appellants 2 to 4, as joint family manager, was a partner in the partnership KNPP Narayanasami Chettiar & Company. THE said partnership filed returns for income-tax purposes for the asst. yrs. 1952-53, 1953-54 and 1954-55. As per the returns filed, the firm contended that there is no assessable income as the business resulted in a loss. THE IT Department, on finding that there was some concealed income, added the concealed income to the returns and started penal proceedings under s. 28(1)(c) of the Indian IT Act, 1922 and levied a penalty of Rs. 85, 000 against the firm on 23-9-1961.

(3.) THE IT Department contended that the late P. P. Narayanasami Chettiar was a partner of the firm and was also the 'Kartha' and family manager, and therefore, they were all jointly and severally liable for any penalty levied against the firm, and the same is also finding on the appellants who are members of the family, and therefore, the properties of P. P. Narayanasami Chettiar in the hands of the appellants are liable to be proceeded against. THE ld. Subordinate Judge, after taking into consideration the relevant provision in the IT Act and the Partnership Act, came to the conclusion that the appellants are not entitled to any relief. As against the said judgment, the appellants herein filed A.S. No. 186 of 1976, on the file of the District Judge, Salem, and the ld. District Judge, after considering the facts of the case and the reported decisions cited before him, came to the same conclusion and confirmed the judgment of the trial Court. This second appeal is filed challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment of the ld. District Judge.