TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 72
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... From perusal of the order passed by the tribunal, it is evident that the tribunal has set aside the order of assessment mainly on the ground that the Assessing Authority has not recorded independent findings to revoke reassessment proceeding and the order of re-assessment has been passed on the directions of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The tribunal has not considered the provisions of Explanation 2(b) to Section 153 of the Act, by which the Assessing Authority is empowered to include any income excluded from total income of a person and is treated to be income of another person, then such an assessment of the income on such other person shall be deemed to be paid in consequence of or to give effect to any finding or directio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is stated that Shri Rajkumar appeared before the Investigation Wing of the Department and gave a statement on 26/08/2008 and also filed a letter dated 24/12/2008 before the ADIT, Investigation Wing that the income earned from real estate activities belong to the HUF. However, no returns were filed. While matter stood thus, assessments were completed in the hands of Shri Rajkumar, in his individual capacity u/s 143(3) read with sec.153C of the of the Incometax Act, 1961 on 28/2/2010 for the assessment years 2005- 06 to 2007-08. In the said assessments, the income earned from the activity of real estate, and gains arising out of sale of lands etc. was brought to tax. However, on appeal the CIT(A) accepted the contention of the assessee that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itted by revising their returns and hence, it is held that A.O. shall take steps to assess the above income of Rs.1,60,68,940/- only in the hands of their HUF as directed in AY 2005-06. 2007-08: 'Apparently, the facts of A.Y. 2005-06 as narrated in para 3.3. of A.Y 2005-06 in this Order are clearly applicable and since the nucleus of the funds have come from the HUF and in particular from the sale of Kasavanahalli lands and other assets and income of the HUE, the above incomes should have been assessed in the hands of the appellant's HUF and not in his individual capacity. The income earned in the individual capacity of Rs.54,72,500/- has been separately admitted by revising their returns and hence, it is held that A.O. shall ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ii) K Ramesh Reddy HUF v. ACIT ITA No.1057/Bang/ 2017 6. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that there was specific directions in the case of individual by the CIT(A) to assess the income in the hands of the HUF. Therefore, the A.O. has correctly initiated reassessment proceedings by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the I.T.Act. It was contended by the learned DR that time limit for issuance of notice u/s 148 of the I.T.Act is not barred by limitation in view of the provisions of section 150(1) of the I.T.Act. 7. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. Section 150 of the I.T.Act provides for extended time limit when an assessment / reassessment is done in pursuance / consequent to giving effect to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....kanna & Sons in IT Reference Case No.57/1994 (judgment dated 26.05.2005) had held that when HUF was not assessed in that status prior to the relevant assessment year, the Assessing Officer has erred in assessing the assessee as an HUF after the disruption of the HUF. It was held by the Hon'ble Court that fiction that a joint family shall be deemed to continue, enunciated in section 171(1) of the I.T.Act is only for limited purpose of roping in cases of joint families which had hitherto been assessed. It was further observed by the Hon'ble Court that it is not possible to extend that fiction beyond the field legitimately intended by the statute. It was held by the Hon'ble Court that the expression "hitherto assessed" occurring in section 171....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee-family was not assessed as a HUF. Hence, on 30.11.2006, when the assessment was made, the HUF was not in existence. In such a case, the procedure prescribed under Section 171 will have no application as the assessee was not hitherto assessed as HUF and so, the fiction created under that section to deem it as HUF will not arise. There is no other provision to assess the HUF after disruption. Apart from Section 171 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and perhaps to a certain extent, Sub-section (4) of Section 170 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, there is no machinery to assess a Hindu undivided family which had disrupted and the said machinery provides only in the case of 'families hitherto assessed as undivided', it is difficult to....