COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. KRISHNA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, referring for our answer the following question of law :

(2.) THE reference arises out of the protective assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1972-73. THE assessee received property on a partition of a bigger HUF. THE validity of that partition is in question in the assessment of Seth Gopaldas (HUF). THE High Court has held the partition to be invalid,--but the case is pending in appeal before the Supreme Court [1983] 141 ITR 577 (SC) against the judgment of the High Court, which is reported as CIT v. Seth Gopaldas [1979] 116 ITR 577 (MP). THE assessee's family consisted of himself and his wife. THE assessee submitted his return in the status of an HUF. THE assessee was assessed by the ITO in the status of an individual. THE AAC confirmed the order of the ITO that as the assessee had no living child, he and his wife could not be said to constitute an HUF. THE Tribunal, in further appeal, held that the assessee and his wife constituted an HUF and the assessee should be assessed in the status of an HUF.