HARGOVINDSING NARAINSING Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this reference under S. 66(1) of the Indian INCOME TAX ACT, 1922, the question that is referred for determination is :

(2.) THE case relates to the asst. year 1956 -57 for which the relevant previous year is from May 9, 1954, to May 31, 1955. The assessee is an HUF, namely, M/s Hargovindsing Narainsing. For the asst. year 1956 -57 on May 3, 1956, the ITO issued a notice under S. 22(2) of the Act, in the name of

(3.) IN appeal by the assessee before the Tribunal, it was also contended that the initiation of the proceedings under S. 34 of the Act was invalid in law, because a notice under S. 22(2) of the Act was issued and served upon the Court receiver ; that pursuant to the said notice the Court receiver had submitted three returns pertaining to the accounting period ; that so long as no proper order was passed upon these returns, it was not permissible to the ITO to issue a notice under S. 34 of the Act. While passing its original order, the Tribunal took the view that two of the returns filed by the Court receiver were unsigned and were not valid returns and that he was not bound to take cognizance thereof ; that the notice under S. 22(2) was issued in the name of the HUF, but the HUF did not file any return in pursuance of the said notice. The Tribunal accordingly took the view that initiation of proceedings was permissible under S. 34 of the Act.