Appeals partially allowed, lands not clubbed for tax, accurate assessment emphasized. Refund ordered, reassessment directed.

The appeals were partially allowed, and the cases were remanded for further investigation and possible reassessment. The lands gifted to the wife and son were not to be clubbed with the assessee's lands for tax assessment purposes. The estimation of agricultural income by the Assistant Commissioner was upheld, but the Tribunal emphasized the need for accurate determination of lands in possession for tax assessment. Excess tax collected was to be refunded, and the assessing officer was directed to conduct further inquiry and reassessment based on the Tribunal's findings.

---

---

Issues:
- Reduction of assessment for assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 by the Assistant Commissioner, Agrl. Income Tax, Jaypore.
- Dispute over ownership of lands gifted to wife and son.
- Estimation of agricultural income.

Analysis:
The appeals were filed against the orders of the Assistant Commissioner reducing the assessment for the years 1973-74 and 1974-75. The revenue claimed the assessee owned various types of lands and did not maintain proper agricultural accounts, leading to assessments based on best judgment. The tax amounts assessed were challenged by the assessee, leading to further reduction by the Assistant Commissioner.

Regarding the ownership dispute, the assessee gifted lands to his wife and son, which were contested in the appeal. The Tribunal acknowledged the family custom of gifting land to the wife as Sindur Tika and the partition decree allotting lands to the son. It was held that the lands gifted to the wife and son should not be clubbed with the assessee's lands for tax assessment purposes. The lands gifted were to be taxed separately, and the son's lands were to be assessed separately if required by law.

The estimation of agricultural income was also a point of contention. The Assistant Commissioner's estimation was deemed reasonable by the Tribunal, and it was upheld against the assessee's challenge. However, the Tribunal emphasized the need to determine the actual lands in possession of the assessee for accurate tax assessment. Therefore, the case was remanded to the assessing officer for further inquiry and reassessment based on the Tribunal's observations.

In conclusion, the appeals were partially allowed, and the cases were remanded for further investigation and possible reassessment. Any excess tax collected was to be refunded accordingly.

---