MUKUNCHAND BOTHRA & SONS (HUF),CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 54/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 October 2018AY 2005-063 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that if the status of HUF has been held to not exist, then assessments made in that status cannot survive. Consequently, the assessments made in the hands of the HUF were quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Mr. Mukunchand Bothra & Sons (HUF), filed four appeals against orders of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2001-02, 2002-03, 2005-06, and 2006-07. The core issue revolved around the existence of the HUF status.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the assessments made in the status of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) could survive if the existence of the HUF itself was not accepted.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, C/“SMC” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN

For Respondent: Mr. B.Sagadevan, JICIT, D.R
Hearing: 23.10.2018

आदेश / O R D E R

1.

These four appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-5, Chennai in dated 08.12.2016 for the assessment year 2001- 02, in dated 08.12.2016 for the assessment year 2002-03, in ITA No.117/CIT(A)-5/13-14 dated 08.12.2016 for the assessment year 2005-06, and in ITA No.116/CIT(A)-5/13-14 dated 08.12.2016 for the assessment year 2006-07.

2.

Shri Gagan Botara represented on behalf of the Assessee and Shri B.Sagadevan represented on behalf of the Revenue.

3.

As all these four appeals of assessee involved identical issue, the same is disposed off by this common order.

4.

It was submitted by ld.A.R that the ld. Assessing Officer had made assessments in the status of HUF. It was a submission that the Ld.CIT(A) without granting opportunity to the assessee has held that the existence of HUF is not proved. It was a submission that once HUF has been held to not exist, assessments in the status of HUF cannot survive. In reply, ld.D.R vehemently supported the orders of the ld. Assessing Officer and the Ld.CIT(A).

5.

I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of order of the Ld.CIT(A) shows that the existence of HUF in the case of assessee has been held to have been not proved. This being so, the existence of HUF status being questioned and its existence is not accepted, assessments of the assessee in the status of HUF cannot survive. Consequently, the assessments made in the hands of HUF for the assessment years 2001- 02, 2002-03, 2005-06, 2006-07 status stands quashed.

6.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court after conclusion of hearing on 23rd October, 2018, at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →