https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8795 Reassessment under section 34(1)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was upheld because later material indicated that the assessee had not made a full and true disclosure of the primary facts relating to the source of investment, and the sufficiency of the grounds for the reopening was not open to appellate-style scrutiny. The share in Kaloogala Estate, the interest on fixed deposits representing its sale proceeds, and the corresponding wealth-tax value were held taxable in the hands of the assessee-family because the estate share was found to have been acquired with joint family funds. For the assessment year 1950-51, however, the inclusion of the share income was not sustained because the evidentiary foundation then available was incomplete. en-us Fri, 14 Apr 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Jun 2009 17:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8795 Reassessment under section 34(1)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was upheld because later material indicated that the assessee had not made a full and true disclosure of the primary facts relating to the source of investment, and the sufficiency of the grounds for the reopening was not open to appellate-style scrutiny. The share in Kaloogala Estate, the interest on fixed deposits representing its sale proceeds, and the corresponding wealth-tax value were held taxable in the hands of the assessee-family because the estate share was found to have been acquired with joint family funds. For the assessment year 1950-51, however, the inclusion of the share income was not sustained because the evidentiary foundation then available was incomplete. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 14 Apr 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8795