Karnataka High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Puttaranga Naika (Huf) on 13 September, 2011
Bench: N.Kumar, Ravi Malimath
' , ye wa ee oe tbat @ esa eh on * ca seats Ee gene ath hp x vai Ps, Day e Rtas, "at i aa, ues aS ap ey sos o rd -_ Phe wey hae bes 8 he a aged oe iF toed VV iLVN Sy rie) Let OS i eid WHY LIN AQ Aa Peys E14 COPD N EWS 4A) PM SEPWS LEENTLE wrnaaer endures: Gok A Sem omen em a S ae ae: a. te 3 be 3° S a. . =
© =o 'eo e Oe c ae "y, i an Be ae af eo :
a a F .
= Bac a ae a.
an qussiion of iw do arec jor consideration whieh + ie an pe i mont pee anit. "18 shops in a i ae Fyn 8 "s goog EE 20 eal i sy yoo rs cess : , oe « a + . : ae ES s Ad ° Bs, . a ' ' sl 'VE £62 shed % : ee ies get ee | § "few ntialt op ar Ea. ae : Bug a Com Pe if .
pe ~ Dy a a sh suc io tal ve Say es yor Pa uh Pus a t ape a?
spent : o : ae Se sage ae ' ve . g * 5 es eR a io . 2 aol - 4 ue Bn Oo = ae ho ae
2 a ce oek : gen shee og evade A vf 4 ee gat oe apa 's en ous take tht bs "
Es R gees body iy, om es . alls en ooh oy s) out gostl A Fla ae: gee, Hae Pe nt Ea ee ~ ar: "es : " * : 4 i va in 4 s &, = 8 4 . "Sil 4 nee S 9 & 3 Na ol ae e = pa . & i = Boe Q ge ae PR ee an Nase Pe Bong pak BNOD HOM WIVAVNNYN JO LurhOd | z Hei wy HVE 2O JHPQS HOM SOVEV NYY 4D DHOO5 Wl sor rengorow aes capree. amis 4 gy Wy de LETS ELE GAD PRESSE BU WRI Pm Fea er name New ne ae Nie "hol wy ms 'hag ps by ied ig art = "ye ee "s sd iy 4 * ri zs ng ay is "
Ng Fave gant oad gf cs sas i pot oe if BS Tas a, a i la < Be '-
& # es, e as" & # ay <a ae a ON genes gee es gels J : eon io a ase cs Na = ga oe Bee a Ps "had S iy 'ay :
4. os ke, uh ee " ¥ ag nde the a * ia shy gat a se & a . "dug 5 cay a : mal ae a gs had wget po sth we bagel 8 Ba ae tio a fy me pe , :
GE 2 a 4 Fe fe 3 ea aS ih we bal ih = " "ech ay ee, Beate shed . hs, saat taoly "eat wal ty = Mb ae 3 FUPR LERLTLY Sewer a nee Fa Be Wem Sco ee ROH SOWING JO LAOS HOI VVWLYNNON 40 LAOS Haha wiviwniey aR os SEE AE OENELISESEN ERE SAE SUP RAIS ALARA HIGH GOURT OF KARMATAIA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARMATAKA HIGH COURT : change pn Central Act ened ; for that, year we provisions af ine incom Tax Ac 73 pte of fie previous y every ipersow. See. a2 ef the Act define a of the css whe tix a8 a s@G 171 of the Act has hide once = pane by. ime Income Tax Section 171 of the Act will have no appl |. the assessee wae not hitherts asses:
BAREIS SEENON ISIS. FGI GAGE SG RUARATAA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURS onl i on 25.4.1 therefore, wher the S37, 2990, | the FIUF ipae not. in herefirg'" the pr rbed under as HUF here ig ne other provision to assess the NUF Zz e fler partition. Alternatively, i con be said that OURT e PERE USPRIORONTESEESESUES SAGER AERA LARA FGM COURT GF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH 2 Apex Court in the fact ie tacit. = ;
eager had never been assessed as HUF me prior to the assesement year 1980-1 981. mate | for the pirecuction of which SSA} in the Ine Tax Act, ma 171 of the Income Tex Act, the rest dM . "become divided, | . "though when the income w SEENON ER TEINS PEGE SoA LEE RG RARBUVEARA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF MARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR"
: jam athe. "
con if at gee me as the saise ts in 14(3) of the Act." the szecsaes 'e ah undi gs be made ther ec in the year of s jomed. In other words under. ° hae -secepe EEE EE ISARASISELBESSESES AEDES IER TABE, ARGH GOURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARMATAICA HIGH COURT al entity or a jurwtic an + etion 4 of the Act i a cher section. The tax shell of the totel income of the on. Inthe acheime of the Act, pution 139 of the. Act. eotment is done im with the pro ure peeseriked under the Act. Howe Hone such retry is filed by « 4 Asseasing OMeer he it m@ only weotl, the order of assesamernt coukl be # EEN ES LISEL IIE TEED NADIR SEP BRARNATABA FIGH COURT OF KARMATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAICA HIGH COURT OF BRARNATAKA HIGH COLR ok of ths Act, an erder of eseseement could be wtuaniedt mingt te < sa whe ie in exietence on the ny shes *s order @ paeead, -- : Court in the one: 'of AD DIMIORAL 670 i in 1965 (55) TTR 866, t wit th which Section '95. A of rwrelecd ee nnn et WEAN te ws UR T aa "Act, . a Sectiten, DEA of the | sg i9ga helt SENN OME MENUS URE THT COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH ¢ rejyerred te in baie wnel nod e Acca ee NRE EASPORTS as is. IE the feran appa have to be initlare for initiation of the MGit .OURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT GF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR HUF je & condition oreo. = linge under t lion the day ef imtiation of the prc 'ot create a HUF iy divided yeare back can be Mme SO tae EHP PNET UR Receding authorities for the gure SESE EELS ER ELIENESER AEA GAP KOREA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAICA HIGH COURT OF KARMATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT a4 fick. Pgs BUF te ee itime. By introduction of eh ae te gut to thie Ke ation of Sect ton 17k ot tthe sh the feet erat: ian chat o on thie day % ee fae oy virtue of the be URT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COL is > only after 'the me 148 cf the Act. Thow ceemeee Sone WP PRIMA LAR HIGH CO bot Ra provision it sontinues te tant sae, te. Rot.in dispute inte 4 Hindu adit Family which ow:
HUF wan diary = iors, The seid y returns. The HUF had not beer assessed for tax, It "
years Sheva er the 2 ing of the with the authorities, it im sot in dispute thet o copy of this: partition dead was preduced before the authorities corttarnding thet the HUF oo more exiets ater the Le rant oASSeNte substantial ques amewersd in fhwour of the SEINE SERENE DIRISER ESM Sod REGIE RARER USRA PMG COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT 26 it "ution ef tee eek.
Hot ari the ¢ HOP in their individual - i from the HUP im their | the HUF when e HUF wee not in exietence om the day they iratiat and on the day the order wae. isély what. the appellate aut | beve cone.
af lew WRT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT oF RARMATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAIC HIGH COUR Bey tax, "he 'Carinet be BREE Eee So Saal TS BP A NABI TEE B SOI NDE Fg Dee "9 rigte of ¢ Bia engl i7. Ineo far as the contention of the Reverie that thie income either at the hands of ths indbviduial or - a harice of the aBeer eee indlivie income at 0 ae UP alac: eannot et be heki that ] BMC ortler would be Prejudicial we. the Re ae eould he colkeotad: on a ther stove anc such a ator cannot, 8 ennoiun - Urvler the Act, the petit form the provieions rise in the Age 7 tnx it payable urder law, the ne option. if under | iaw he ia net leble to oY such to pay equitable consideration &2 $0Ug00 to pe meade out & mt of the Tribunal, they co when in law ne tex & payable the Court should take ea Me the imcte which are intimately co: mected, but mera memitoicsaBene iste, KARNATAKA HiGh COURT OF RARMATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT cas cae JCA Mae COG) @ HOF which wes mot m GEL the . aay uo epee can be procewied against I~ egeinet the atone or on squiteble the letter. of lew, 'The assens yt be male to. cay tox... Therefore, we do not fi y substance art ibe ged co: we do net find any merit in thie apy