PRAKASH KRISHNA, J.

( 1 ) THE Tribunal, Allahabad, at the instance of the assessee has referred the following three questions of law for opinion to this Court under Section 256 (1) of the IT Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) :

"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the (case), the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the notices issued under Section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 addressed as M/s Shri Nath suresh Chand Ram Naresh, Karta Shri Nath, were valid notices to assess the income of the HUF of M/s Munnalal Motilal or Motilal Shri Nath or its successors ?" 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the returns filed by Suresh Chand without filling in the column relating to status were valid returns ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the infirmity in the notices issued under Section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 was cured under Section 292b of the above Act ?"

( 2 ) THE facts of the case are as follows :

"the assessment years involved are asst. yrs. 1968-69 to 1976-77. The Tribunal in its order has held that the reassessment proceedings for the asst. yrs. 1970-71 to 1976-77 are not valid and set aside the reassessment orders for these years with the direction to the ITO to proceed to comply with the various provisions of Section 171 of the Act. However, the service of the notice under section 148/139 (2) for all these years was found valid and the jurisdiction for reassessment or assessment was correctly exercised by the ITO. "

( 3 ) M/s Munnalal Motilal was an HUF of which Shri Munna Lal was the Karta. This HUF was duly assessed under the Act upto the asst. yr. 1966-67 vide GIR No. 711-M. Shri Moti Lal, the karta of HUF, died sometime in the month of April, 1967. Thereafter the business which was carried on by M/s Munnalal Motilal was carried on later on in the name and style of M/s Motilal sri Nath, in the status of HUF through its Karta Sri Nath. On 31st July, 1969, there was a partition in the family and the capital of HUF amounting to Rs. 14,716. 66 was divided between three brothers, namely, Sri Nath, Suresh Chand and Ram Naresh who were coparceners also. According to the assessee, it was oral partition and it is evident by the entries in the books of account. The two brothers, namely, Sri Nath and Suresh Chand after partition started business in partnership in the name of Sri Nath Suresh Chand. The third brother Shri Ram Naresh left the scene. The said partnership, namely, Sri Nath Suresh Chand was also dissolved on 31st March, 1972. Thereafter Suresh Chand started his separate business of Sarrafa w. e. f. 1st April, 1972 in the name and style Suresh Chand Manish Kumar and Sri Nath also started his separate business in the name of sri Nath.

( 4 ) THE IT Department on 18th Nov. , 1976 searched the premises of the assessee and seized the books of Motilal Sri Nath, Sri Nath Suresh Chand and Suresh Chand Manish Kumar. It may be noticed here that prior to the aforesaid search, the various members of the family, namely, Sri nath, Suresh Chand, Smt. Kamala Devi, widow of late Moti Lal, Shakuntala Devi, wife of Sri nath, Smt. Asha Rani, wife of Suresh Chand and Smt. Santosh Kumari wife of Ram Naresh had filed their IT returns in their individual capacities in 1975-76. These persons also disclosed that the HUF named and styled as M/s Munna Lal Moti Lal through Moti Lal as Karta was dissolved in the year 1967 on account of the death of Shri Moti Lal who died in April, 1967. Thereafter the huf business was carried by Sri Nath as Karta under the name and style of M/s Moti Lal Sri nath upto 31st July, 1969, when the partition took place. The ITO was of the view that the oral partition as alleged by the assessee was not recognized by the Department as no order under Section 171 of the IT Act was passed and, therefore, the HUF continued to exist. He was of the opinion that the seized account books show that there was e

Click Here to Read the rest of this document