TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1980 (11) TMI 87
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Thiru Karthikeya Kumara Pethannel Bhoopathy and Thiru Venkata Sivasubramania. Veeranayaga Pethannel Bhoopathy (Minors) Guardian Through mother Muthumeenakshi. Veeralakshmi Nagammal. In the course of the order, the AO in the assessment order dt. 9th Sept., 1979 under reference (Ref. GIR 29/S/VKM/1972-73) observed as under: "...I have gone through the records and also the earlier assessment records. I made local enquiries too. The assessment in this case was finalised in previous year assigning the status HUF. A perusal of the earlier assessment records would show that there was a claim of partition in the year 1968-69 and it was not considered. The authorities representative of the assessee had given a statement before the assessing aut....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....laim for partition and there was nothing to support this by a valid document. 5. On appeal, the Asstt. Commr. supported the order of the Agrl. ITO. 6. The main contention of the appellant's learned counsel is that the claim for partition should have been enquired into and recognised; that even otherwise the mother was acting only as a guardian for the minor children and the separated properties of two co-parceners should not be clubbed. In this connection, it is urged that the appellant by mistake did not object to the assessment made in the statute of HUF upto the asst. yr. 1971-72 and this by itself cannot be a reason for rejecting the claim for all the subsequent years. 7. The learned State Representative submitted that there wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filed in respect of the two brothers on similar lines. Similarly for the asst. yr. 1974-75 two returns were filed and the same procedure was followed and so on for subsequent years. 10. The contention of the Revenue mainly is that no formal and specific claim requesting for an order under s. 29 was made and in the absence of such a claim the Agrl. ITO repeated that status as HUF as was done upto the asst. yr. 1971-72 and included the income from these lands. 11. The learned counsel for the appellant is right in his contention that the appellant need not suffer in the subsequent years if he had committed a mistake in accepting the continuance of the HUF in the assessment orders upto 1971-72 and it is open to the appellant to bring the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....time he felt that the partial partition was true and directed that the income from the lands allotted to each of the shares should have to be assessed at their respective hands separately. This order was made by the Agrl. ITO on 14th May, 1961." 14. When this order was disturbed by the learned Commr. the matter went to High Court. Their Lordships observed at p. 422 : (69 ITR) "...No doubt a father and his two wives might be taken to have been living during the accounting year along with their children. Not that we find it so on evidence. But being a partial partition we do not see how the fact of their living together will militate against the partition deed being otherwise than genuine. On this matter the ITO made a correct approach. As....