https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190365 Where the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was already operative in a merged State by notification, the protection in paragraph 5 of the Merged States (Taxation Concessions) Order, 1949 did not apply, because the income was not assessed under a different State law; reopening under section 34 for escaped income was therefore valid. The claimed partition of the Hindu undivided family was not proved: the returns continued to show a joint family, no reliable partition or relinquishment document was produced, and the surrounding records did not support disruption of the family. The income from the businesses started by the two major sons was properly included in the family's total income. en-us Thu, 24 Jan 1963 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:46:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190365 Where the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was already operative in a merged State by notification, the protection in paragraph 5 of the Merged States (Taxation Concessions) Order, 1949 did not apply, because the income was not assessed under a different State law; reopening under section 34 for escaped income was therefore valid. The claimed partition of the Hindu undivided family was not proved: the returns continued to show a joint family, no reliable partition or relinquishment document was produced, and the surrounding records did not support disruption of the family. The income from the businesses started by the two major sons was properly included in the family's total income. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 Jan 1963 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190365