1950 (3) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sed to tax as a Hindu joint family and Subansa made an application to the Income-tax Officer at the time of assessment for the assessment year 1943-44 that there had been a partition and that an order to that effect should be made. Section 25A contemplates an enquiry being made by the Income-tax Officer on notice being served on all the members of the family, and if the Income-tax Officer is satisfied on making such inquiry that the joint family property has been partitioned among the various members or groups of members in definite portions, he has to record an order to that effect. On the application of Subansa the Income-tax Officer served a notice on all the members of the family including the applicant, and having made the necessary in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nal also rejected his appeal. 2. Now, the question that arise for our determination is whether there was any obligation upon the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to hear the applicant before he made an order reversing the decision of the Income-tax Officer. The Attorney-General has our attention to the different in language between Section 25A Section 30. Whereas Section 25A provides for a notice being served by the Income-tax Officer on all the members of the family before any order is recorded under that section, Section 30 does not cast a similar obligation upon the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and therefore the Attorney-General argues that in the absence of any statutory provision there was no obligation upon the Appellate Assis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in contravention of the rules of natural justice, it was not a decision at all in law. It is not disputed by the Attorney-General, and indeed it cannot be disputed, that the right of the applicant were vitally affected by the decision arrived at by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Whereas he and the members of his family had been assessed as a joint Hindu family unit, behind his back and without hearing him, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had held that he should be assessed as an individual. Therefore, in my opinion, the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner cannot be supported at all and that decision was not binding and never bound the applicant. If that decision is bad and not ....