1996 (5) TMI 58
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mined in the case of the firm where he is a partner ? " The facts which are necessary for determination of this application are that the assessee filed a return of income for the assessment year 1984-85 in the status of the Hindu undivided family (specified) declaring a net income of Rs. 42,810. The source of income was shown as share from the firm, dividend and interest. The assessing authority held that the income shown by the assessee is actually assessable in his individual hand and not in the status of the Hindu undivided family. The assessing authority passed an order dated March 12, 1987, and directed the issue of penalty notice. The respondent filed an appeal against the order of assessment, which was accepted by the Deputy Commiss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ong with the statement of the case, but declined to refer the second question by holding that the matter entirely depends on the facts of the case whether the assessee had paid advance tax on the basis of the share income intimated to him by the firm and if the income of the firm was subject to the enhancement on account of certain additions, the assessee could not be said to have knowledge of such enhancement at the time of payment of advance tax. Shri Sawhney, learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that after having held that question No. 1 deserves to be referred to the High Court for adjudication, the Tribunal ought to have referred the second question regarding interest for adjudication by the High Court. Learned counsel submitted....