Mandatory enquiry into partition claims under expenditure tax law governs assessment against a Hindu undivided family

Section 19 of the Expenditure-tax Act requires the assessing authority, when a partition claim is raised during assessment, to enquire into the claim and either record an order recognising partition or declare the Hindu undivided family as continuing. The provision applies even where the alleged partition is said to have occurred after the close of the accounting year, provided the claim is raised in the assessment proceedings. Failure to conduct the mandatory enquiry and pass the required order constitutes breach of a statutory duty and can be challenged under Article 226. Where partition is established, assessment cannot proceed against the karta alone. The separate claim for basic allowance was left open.

---

---

Issues: Whether section 19 of the Expenditure-tax Act, 1957 applies where the claim of partition relates to a partition said to have taken place after the close of the accounting year, and whether the assessing authority was bound to enquire into and record an order on such claim before proceeding with the assessment.

Analysis: Section 19 requires the Expenditure-tax Officer, when a partition claim is brought to notice during assessment, to enquire into the claim and, if satisfied, to record an order of partition; if not satisfied, to declare the family as continuing to be a Hindu undivided family. The provision was held to apply even where the alleged partition occurred after the accounting year, so long as the claim was raised during the assessment proceedings. The authority had not made the mandatory enquiry or passed the required order under the section. The challenge to the assessment was therefore maintainable under Article 226 as a complaint of breach of a mandatory statutory requirement, not merely of lack of jurisdiction. The petitioner's status as karta also depended on the partition claim; if partition is established, assessment cannot proceed against him alone as karta. The separate claim for basic allowance was not adjudicated and was left open.

Conclusion: The assessment order was quashed because the assessing authority failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of section 19.

---