2003 (9) TMI 73

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ersons and tax was charged at the maximum marginal rate under the Income-tax Act. True copy of the assessment order is annexure 1 to the writ petition. Against this order, the petitioner filed an appeal which was allowed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who set aside the order of the Income-tax Officer and directed him to pass a fresh order. True copy of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), is annexure 2 to the writ petition. Against this order, the Department filed an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal which dismissed the appeal. True copy of the order of the Tribunal is annexure 3 to the writ petition. It is alleged in paragraph 4 of the writ petition that in pursuance of the order of the Commi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y amounting to Rs. 2,88,609 with the trust. The above amounts were added to the assessee's income by the Income-tax Officer who also disallowed the interest credited on those deposits. The Income-tax Officer observed that as there was no legal trust in existence, the income actually belongs to the trustees. Accordingly, he framed the assessment on protective basis in the status of association of persons and charged the tax at the maximum marginal rate as the members and their shares were found to be undetermined. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) allowed the assessee's appeal and directed that the income be assessed substantively and in the status claimed in the return. In further appeal, the Tribunal held that the substantive ass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ter considering the material." In view of the above observation, the Tribunal rightly observed in paragraph 4 of its order that the: "issue of framing substantive assessment in the hands of the real owner of the income earned during the year under consideration is wide open in this case resulting in no apprehension of loss of revenue to the Department." Since the assessment order was set aside by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) by his order dated March 21, 1988, a fresh assessment could have been made latest by March 31, 1990, vide section 153(2A) of the Income-tax Act but no fresh order was made by that date and hence the petitioner is right in saying that the same has become time-barred. In Hari Nandan Agarwal (HUF) v....