Konkani Bharat Dairy Farm (AOP) v. Asstt. CIT
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Income - Assessability -Status -Family members engaged in business of dairy farming
Four members of a family were carrying on business of dairy farming. During survey conducted upon assessee, one of member K, had given statement. AO held that dairy business was being carried on by an AOP comprising of said four members of family. Thereafter, he issued notice under section 148 in name of dairy farm being run by family and framed assessment orders, accordingly, in status of an AOP. Held: No material on record to show that members of family had joined together and had pooled their funds/resources with a view to jointly engage themselves in common activity of dairy business, and facts brought on record only showed that family members were doing their business at same premises and that they were helping each other in their business activities and thereupon, it could be said that no material evidence was provided by AO to prove that an AOP existed and therefore, impugned assessment made in status of an AOP was not sustainable.
Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 4
A.Y. :1993-94 to 2001-02
Decision: In favour of assessee
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Reassessment - Notice under section 148 -Service of notice -Validity
Held: Notice served on principal officer alone would be a valid notice as per section 282(2)(c), but while in instant case where four persons assessed individually were held by AO to form an AOP, in such a case burden of proof was on AO to prove that an AOP existed and thus, notice under section 148 should be served on all members to keep order valid under section 147. Since, notice under section 148 was not served on all four members, therefore, for mom-proper service of notice, assessment orders deserved to be quashed.
Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 148
A.Y. :1993-94 to 2001-02
Decision: In favour of assessee.