TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1977 (12) TMI 22
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he income from profession. The department received information that the assessee's income was much more. The Income-tax Officer issued a notice under section 274(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on 28th September, 1962. The assessee then filed a return in Form No. 2 on 29th November, 1962. In this return he disclosed a total income of Rs. 43,930, out of which Rs. 40,000 was declared as income from private practice. The Income-tax Officer computed his total income at Rs. 67,944, which included a sum of Rs. 64,014 as income from private practice. In appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner reduced the taxable income by Rs. 9,000. In further appeal, the Tribunal reduced the income from private practice to Rs. 40,000. As the minimum penalt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the various categories of clauses mentioned, in the form prescribed for it. For an individual having professional income besides salary, the prescribed form was Form No. 2. In view of the provisions of the Act and the rules, it was mandatory for the assessee to have filed a return in Form No. 2. The original return was in Form No. 4. Prima facie it can be said that it was not a return in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the rules. It could be ignored by the Income-tax Officer and he should not have persisted to compute the total income of the assessee according to his judgment. This view is supported by a decision of this court in Abhey Ram Chunni Lal, In re [1933] 1 ITR 126 (All). In that case, an incomplete return was file....