{"id":159530,"date":"2009-01-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-01-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009"},"modified":"2018-08-01T03:21:57","modified_gmt":"2018-07-31T21:51:57","slug":"ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009","title":{"rendered":"M\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And &#8230; on 20 January, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And &#8230; on 20 January, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>ITA NO.30 OF 2006                    [1]\n\n\n             IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA\n                           AT CHANDIGARH\n\n                                      ITA NO.30 OF 2006\n                                      Date of decision: 20.01.2009\n\nM\/s Tirlochan Singh                               .......Appellant\n\n                   versus\n\nCommissioner of Income Tax and another ......Respondents\n\nCORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.S.KHEHAR\n             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH\n\nPresent:     Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate\n             for the appellant.\n\n             Ms. Savita Saxena, Advocate\n             for the respondents.\n\nJ.S.Khehar, J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>             A   notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act<\/p>\n<p>1961(herein after referred to as the &#8220;Act&#8221;) was issued to the<\/p>\n<p>appellant on 14.03.2002, the same came to be served on the<\/p>\n<p>appallent on 21.03.2002. The claim of the Assessing Officer was<\/p>\n<p>that the appellant was assessable as a Hindu Undivided Family.<\/p>\n<p>On the contrary, the claim of the appellant-assessee was that a<\/p>\n<p>partial    partition   had   taken   place   on   30.04.1978     whereby<\/p>\n<p>immovable as well as movable assests of the Hindu Undivided<\/p>\n<p>Family were divided by metes and bounds                between the co-<\/p>\n<p>parceners, and as such, there was no question of assessing the<\/p>\n<p>appellant as a Hindu Undivided Family.\n<\/p>\n<p>             After 30.04.1978, i.e. after the       partial partition had<\/p>\n<p>taken place amongst the members of the Hindu Undivided<\/p>\n<p>Family, the property in question was sold, and the proceeds<br \/>\n ITA NO.30 OF 2006                [2]<\/p>\n<p>thereof were invested as Fixed Deposit Receipts in the name of<\/p>\n<p>the appellant-assessee i.e. in the capacity of the appellant as a<\/p>\n<p>as a Hindy Undivided Family.           The Fixed Deposit Receipts<\/p>\n<p>eventually matured on 8.09.1996, whereafter, monetary shares<\/p>\n<p>were   allegedly   apportioned   amongst    the   members    of   the<\/p>\n<p>appellant-assessee i.e. the members of the Hindu Undivided<\/p>\n<p>Family. The facts narrated herein are undisputed and are in fact<\/p>\n<p>acknowledged by the learned counsel for the rival parties.<\/p>\n<p>           The question which arises for consideration at the<\/p>\n<p>hands of this Court, while disposing of the present appeal relates<\/p>\n<p>to the Assessment Year 1997-1998. The appellant-assessee as a<\/p>\n<p>Hindy Undivided Family maintains that no assessment can be<\/p>\n<p>made for the Assessment Year in question. It is the submission<\/p>\n<p>of the learned counsel for the appellant that the original property<\/p>\n<p>in the hands of the Hindu Undivided Family, after partial partition<\/p>\n<p>thereof on 30.04.1978 could not be assessed to tax            under<\/p>\n<p>Section 171 of the Act. It is the alternative     contention of the<\/p>\n<p>learned counsel for the appellant,       that even if the    partial<\/p>\n<p>partition referred to above is not taken into consideration, that<\/p>\n<p>would not effect assessment in the hands of the appellant as a<\/p>\n<p>Hindu Undivided Family. In this behalf it is pointed out that the<\/p>\n<p>appellant as a Hindu Undivided Family could have been subjected<\/p>\n<p>to tax only if it had earlier been assessed to tax as a Hindu<\/p>\n<p>Undivided Family. Accordingly, the submission of the learned<\/p>\n<p>counsel for the appellant, that since the appellant-assessee had<\/p>\n<p>never hitherto before(i.e., prior to the Assessment Year 1997-98)<br \/>\n ITA NO.30 OF 2006                   [3]<\/p>\n<p>ever been assessed as a Hindu Undivided Family, there was no<\/p>\n<p>question of the appellant-assessee being assessed as a Hindu<\/p>\n<p>Undivided Family.\n<\/p>\n<p>            In response to a query posed by the Court, learned<\/p>\n<p>counsel for the appellant states that the propertry in the hands of<\/p>\n<p>the Hindu Undivided Family, besides the property which was<\/p>\n<p>subjected   to     partial   partition,   is   not   subject   matter   of<\/p>\n<p>consideration in this appeal. The veracity of the instant answer<\/p>\n<p>at the hands of the learned counsel for the appellant-assessee is<\/p>\n<p>not subject matter of contest at the hands of the learned counsel<\/p>\n<p>for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>            It is in the factual background noticed hereinabove<\/p>\n<p>that we must decide the claim raised by the appellant in this case<\/p>\n<p>in terms of the mandate of Section 171 of the Act. Section 171 of<\/p>\n<p>the Act is being extracted hereunder:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             Section 171(1)       A Hindu family hitherto assessed as<\/p>\n<p>             undivided shall be deemed for the purposes of this<\/p>\n<p>             Act to continue to be a Hindu undivided family,<\/p>\n<p>             except where and in so far as a finding of partition<\/p>\n<p>             has been given under this section in respect of the<\/p>\n<p>             Hindu undivided family.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>             (2)    Where, at the time of making an assessment<\/p>\n<p>             under section 143 or section 144, it is claimed by or<\/p>\n<p>             on behalf of any member of a Hindu family assessed<\/p>\n<p>             as undivided that a partition, whether total or partial,<\/p>\n<p>             has taken place among the members of such family,<br \/>\n ITA NO.30 OF 2006               [4]<\/p>\n<p>          the    [Assessing]    Officer   shall     make    an   inquiry<\/p>\n<p>          thereinto after giving notice of the inquiry to all the<\/p>\n<p>          members of the family.\n<\/p>\n<p>          (3)    On     the   completition     of   the    inquiry,   the<\/p>\n<p>          [Assessing] Officer shall record a finding as to<\/p>\n<p>          whether there has been a total or partial partititon of<\/p>\n<p>          the joint family property, and, if there has been such<\/p>\n<p>          a partition, the date on whic h it has taken place.<\/p>\n<p>          (4)    Where a finding of total or partial partitition has<\/p>\n<p>          been recorded by the [Assessing] Officer under this<\/p>\n<p>          section, and the partition took place during the<\/p>\n<p>          previous year,-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                  (a) the total income of the joint family in<\/p>\n<p>                  respect of the period up to the date of<\/p>\n<p>                  partition shall be assessed as if no partition<\/p>\n<p>                  had taken place; and<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                  (b)    each member or group of members shall,<\/p>\n<p>                  in addition to any tax for which he or it may<\/p>\n<p>                  be    separately    liable   and    notwithstanding<\/p>\n<p>                  anything contained in clause (2) of section 10,<\/p>\n<p>                  be jointly and severally liable for the tax on<\/p>\n<p>                  the income so assessed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>         (5)    Where a finding of total or partial partition has<\/p>\n<p>         been recorded by the[Assessing]            Officer under this<\/p>\n<p>         section, and the partition took place after the expiry<\/p>\n<p>         of the previous year, the total income of the previous<br \/>\n ITA NO.30 OF 2006               [5]<\/p>\n<p>         year of the joint family shall be assessed as if no<\/p>\n<p>         partition had taken place; and the provisions of clause<\/p>\n<p>         (b) of sub-section(4) shall, so far as may be, apply to<\/p>\n<p>         the case.\n<\/p>\n<p>         (6)   Notwithstanding        anything    contained    in   this<\/p>\n<p>         section, if the[Assessing] Officer finds after completion<\/p>\n<p>         of the assessment of a Hindu undivided family that the<\/p>\n<p>         family has already effected a partition, whether total<\/p>\n<p>         or partial, the[Assessing] Officer shall proceed to<\/p>\n<p>         recover the tax from every person who was a member<\/p>\n<p>         of the family before the partition, and every such<\/p>\n<p>         person shall be jointly and severally liable for the tax<\/p>\n<p>         on the income so assessed.\n<\/p>\n<p>         (7)   For the purposes of this section, the several<\/p>\n<p>         liability   of   any   member     or    group   of   members<\/p>\n<p>         thereunder shall be computed according to the portion<\/p>\n<p>         of the joint family property allotted to him or it at the<\/p>\n<p>         partition, whether total or partial.\n<\/p>\n<p>         (8)   The provisions of this section shall, so far as may<\/p>\n<p>         be, apply in relation to the levy and collection of any<\/p>\n<p>         penalty, interest, fine or other sum in respect of any<\/p>\n<p>         period up to date of the partition, whether total or<\/p>\n<p>         partial, of a Hindu undivided family as they apply in<\/p>\n<p>         relation to the levy and collection of tax in respect of<\/p>\n<p>         any such period.<\/p>\n<pre>\n\n         [(9) Notwithstanding         anything    contained    in   the\n ITA NO.30 OF 2006             [6]\n\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>         foregoing provisions of the section, where a partial<\/p>\n<p>         partition    has taken place after the 31st day of<\/p>\n<p>         December, 1978, among the members of a Hindu<\/p>\n<p>         undivided family hitherto assessed as undivided,-<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                (a)   no claim that such partial partition has<\/p>\n<p>                taken place shall be inquired into under sub-<\/p>\n<p>                section(2) and no finding shall be recorded<\/p>\n<p>                under sub-section(3) that such partial partition<\/p>\n<p>                had taken place and any finding recorded under<\/p>\n<p>                sub-section(3) to that effect whether before or<\/p>\n<p>                after the 18th day of June, 1980, being the date<\/p>\n<p>                of introduction of the Finance(No.2) Bill, 1980,<\/p>\n<p>                shall be null and void.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                (b)   such family shall continue to be liable to<\/p>\n<p>                be assessed under this Act as if no such partial<\/p>\n<p>                partition had taken place.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                (c)   each member or group of members of<\/p>\n<p>                such family immediately before such partial<\/p>\n<p>                partition and the family shall be jointly and<\/p>\n<p>                severally liable for any tax, penalty, interest,<\/p>\n<p>                fine or other sum payable under this Act by the<\/p>\n<p>                family in respect of any period, whether before<\/p>\n<p>                or after such partial partition.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>                (d)   the several liability of any member or<\/p>\n<p>                group of members aforesaid shall be computed<\/p>\n<p>                according to the portion of the joint family<br \/>\n ITA NO.30 OF 2006                 [7]<\/p>\n<p>                   property alloted to him or it at such partial<\/p>\n<p>                   partition,<\/p>\n<p>and the provisions of this Act shall apply accordingly.]<\/p>\n<p>Explanation-In this section,-\n<\/p>\n<pre>     (a)    \"partition\" means--\n\n                  (i)    where the property admits of a physical\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>                  division, a physical division of the property, but a<\/p>\n<p>                  physical division of the income without a physical<\/p>\n<p>                  division of the property producing the income<\/p>\n<p>                  shall not be deemed to be a partition; or<\/p>\n<p>                  (ii)   where the property does not admit of a<\/p>\n<p>                  physical division, then such division as the<\/p>\n<p>                  property admits of, but a mere severance of<\/p>\n<p>                  status shall not be deemed to be a partition;<\/p>\n<p>     (b)    &#8220;partial partition&#8221; means a partition which is a partial<\/p>\n<p>     as regards the persons constituting the Hindu undivided<\/p>\n<p>     family, or the properties belonging to the Hindu undivided<\/p>\n<p>     family, or both.\n<\/p>\n<p>            Relying on clause(1) of Section 171 of the Act, it is<\/p>\n<p>contended    on    behalf   of   the    appellant-assessee   that   the<\/p>\n<p>assessment permissible under Section 171 of the Act envisaged<\/p>\n<p>certain pre-requisites. Firstly, the aforesaid assessment must be<\/p>\n<p>in respect of property of a Hindu Family.              Secondly, the<\/p>\n<p>assessment must be in respect of such a Hindu Undivided Family<\/p>\n<p>which has hitherto been assessed as a Hindu Undivided Family.<\/p>\n<p>Although, the facts in this case depict that at some point in time<br \/>\n ITA NO.30 OF 2006               [8]<\/p>\n<p>the appellant-assessee was a Hindu Undivided Family but there is<\/p>\n<p>no dispute whatsoever, that the appellant-assessee has not been<\/p>\n<p>assessed as a Hindu Undivided Family prior to the Assessment<\/p>\n<p>Year 1997-98. In view of the fact, that the conditions pre-<\/p>\n<p>requisite for the application of Section 171 of the Act are not<\/p>\n<p>fulfilled by the appellant-assessee. In the present case, it is the<\/p>\n<p>submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that it was<\/p>\n<p>not open to the Assessing Officer to assess the appellant-<\/p>\n<p>assessee as a Hindu Undivided Family, and as such the<\/p>\n<p>assessment rendered by the Income Tax Officer vide order dated<\/p>\n<p>6.03.2003 is liable to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>           We have carefully examined the ingredients of Section<\/p>\n<p>171(1) of the Act. We have no hesitation in accepting the plea<\/p>\n<p>advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant so as to<\/p>\n<p>conclude, that Section 171 of the Act caters to a situation where<\/p>\n<p>a Hindu Undivided Family has been partitioned.        We are also<\/p>\n<p>satisfied that Section 171 of the Act deals with assessment after<\/p>\n<p>the division of the Hindu Undivided Family.     In our considered<\/p>\n<p>view before Section 171 of the Act can be invoked, so as to<\/p>\n<p>assess the property of the Hindu Undivided Family even after<\/p>\n<p>partition, as a Hindu Undivided Family, it should have been<\/p>\n<p>assesed as a Hindy Undivided Family before such partition.       A<\/p>\n<p>similar conclusion was also expressed by the Gujarat High Court,<\/p>\n<p>as well as, by the Andhra Pradesh High Court.       In this behalf<\/p>\n<p>reference may be made to the decision rendered by the Gujarat<\/p>\n<p>High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Kantilal Ambalal<br \/>\n ITA NO.30 OF 2006              [9]<\/p>\n<p>(HUF),(1991)192 ITR 376 wherein the Court observed as under:-<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                      &#8220;The argument of the Revenue proceeds on<br \/>\n          the assumption that section 171 of the Act applies to<br \/>\n          the facts of the present case. Section 171 of the Act<br \/>\n          has no application to a case of a Hindu family which<br \/>\n          has never been assessed before as a joint family i.e.,<br \/>\n          as a unit of assessment. In other words, this section<br \/>\n          has application to a Hindu family which has been<br \/>\n          assessed before as a joint family and if the Hindu<br \/>\n          undivided family has never been assessed to tax, this<br \/>\n          section has no application. The Hindu undivided family<br \/>\n          of Kantilal Ambalal, admittedly, was never assessed to<br \/>\n          income-tax in the past. Therefore, section 171 of the<br \/>\n          Act has no application at all to the facts of the instant<br \/>\n          case. A similar view has been taken by the Andhra<br \/>\n          Pradesh High Court in Addl. CIT v. P.Durgamma[1987]<br \/>\n          166 ITR 776.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>          It would be pertinent to mention that after          the<\/p>\n<p>passing of the assessment order dated 6.03.2003 the appellant<\/p>\n<p>preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax<\/p>\n<p>(Appeals). The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) vide his<\/p>\n<p>order dated 27.06.2003 accepted the appeal by holding that the<\/p>\n<p>appellant could not have been assessed as a Hindu Undivided<\/p>\n<p>Family, under Section 171 of the Act. The aforesaid finding<\/p>\n<p>rendered by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) dated<\/p>\n<p>27.06.2003, was assailed by the Revenue before the Income Tax<\/p>\n<p>Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal agreed<\/p>\n<p>that the Revenue vide order dated 10.06.2005. In other words,<\/p>\n<p>the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that<\/p>\n<p>the property in question was liable to be assessed in the hands of<\/p>\n<p>the appellant as a Hindu Undivided Family under Section 171(9)<\/p>\n<p>of the Act. It is pertinent to mention that sun-section(9) of<\/p>\n<p>Section 171 of the Act is in the nature of an exception to sub-\n<\/p>\n<p> ITA NO.30 OF 2006              [10]<\/p>\n<p>Section(1) of Section 171 of the Act(relied) upon by the<\/p>\n<p>appellant. The order passed by the Income Tax Appellant<\/p>\n<p>Tribunal dated 10.06.2005 has also been challenged at the hands<\/p>\n<p>of the appellant by asserting that the same is inapplicable in this<\/p>\n<p>case.\n<\/p>\n<p>          During the course of hearing of the instant appeal,<\/p>\n<p>learned counsel for the respondent has solely relied on sub-<\/p>\n<p>section(9) of Section 171 of the Act to defeat the claim of the<\/p>\n<p>appellant. It is the vehement contention of the counsel for the<\/p>\n<p>respondent that partition of the   Hindu Undivided Family in the<\/p>\n<p>present case must be deemed to have taken place on 8.09.1996,<\/p>\n<p>and that, the same cannot be deemed to have taken place prior<\/p>\n<p>thereto, because after the sale of the property of Hindu<\/p>\n<p>Undivided Family the sale proceeds came to be deposited in as<\/p>\n<p>Fixed Deposit Receipts in the name of the        Hindu Undivided<\/p>\n<p>Family. It is submitted that on maturity of the Fixed Deposit<\/p>\n<p>Receipts on 8.09.1996, the proceeds thereof were divided<\/p>\n<p>amongst    the members of the Hindu Unidivided Family. It is<\/p>\n<p>therefore, the submission     of the learned counsel      for the<\/p>\n<p>respondents that it is not open to the appellant to claim partial<\/p>\n<p>partition of the property in question on 30.04.1978.      Learned<\/p>\n<p>counsel for the respondent further submitted, that the partition<\/p>\n<p>of the Hindu Undivided Family in respect of the assessment which<\/p>\n<p>is a subject matter of consideration in the instant appeal, can be<\/p>\n<p>deemed to have taken place after 8.09.1996 i.e.,         after the<\/p>\n<p>maturity of the Fixed Deposit Receipts, and the distribution<br \/>\n ITA NO.30 OF 2006               [11]<\/p>\n<p>thereof in the hands of the co-parceners.\n<\/p>\n<p>           Under the mandate of sub-section(9) of Section 171 of<\/p>\n<p>the Act(extracted above) a partial partition which has taken place<\/p>\n<p>after 31.12.1978 is not recognised,      and as such, the partial<\/p>\n<p>partition alleged to have taken place on 8.09.1996 cannot be<\/p>\n<p>recognised for purpose of taxing the appellant-assessee.<\/p>\n<p>           We have considered the submission advanced by the<\/p>\n<p>learned counsel for the respondent based on sub-section(9) of<\/p>\n<p>Section 171 of the Act. There can be no doubt that sub-section<\/p>\n<p>(9) of Section 171 of the Act, is an exception to sub-Section(1) of<\/p>\n<p>Section 171 of the Act, as such, if the Revenue can establish the<\/p>\n<p>applicability of sub-section(9) of Section 171 of the Act, that<\/p>\n<p>would completely negate the submission advanced by the learned<\/p>\n<p>counsel for the appellant. We shall therefore, in the first instance,<\/p>\n<p>determine the applicability   of sub-section(9) of Section 171 of<\/p>\n<p>the Act, to the facts and ciucumstances of the present case. We<\/p>\n<p>are satisfied that for the applicability of sub-section(9) of the<\/p>\n<p>Section 171 of the Act, two pre-requisites are essential. Firstly,<\/p>\n<p>the partial partition should have taken place after 31.12.19978.<\/p>\n<p>And secondly, such partial partition must have taken place in a<\/p>\n<p>Hindu Undivided Family which hitherto before was assessed as a<\/p>\n<p>Hindu Undivided Family. It is not a matter of dispute, that the<\/p>\n<p>appellant-assessee had not been assessed as a Hindu Undivided<\/p>\n<p>Family ever before the Assessment Year in question, namely<\/p>\n<p>1997-98. We are, therefore, of the firm view, that the second<\/p>\n<p>essential ingredient for the applicability of sub-section(9) of<br \/>\n ITA NO.30 OF 2006              [12]<\/p>\n<p>Section 171 of the Act cannnot be treated to have been fulfilled<\/p>\n<p>in the facts and circumstances of the present case. As such we<\/p>\n<p>are of the view that    sub-section(9) of Section 171 of the Act<\/p>\n<p>would be clearly inapplicable to the facts of the present case.<\/p>\n<p>           In view of the above, we are of the view that the<\/p>\n<p>following substantial question of law framed at the time of<\/p>\n<p>admission of the instant appeal deserves to be answered in<\/p>\n<p>favour of the appellant-assessee and against the Revenue:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                      &#8220;Whether in the facts and circumstances of<br \/>\n           the present case, the action of the authorities below in<br \/>\n           invoking the provision of Section 171, when the<br \/>\n           appellant was never assessed before the issuance of<br \/>\n           notice under Section 148 of the Act on 14.3.2002 for<br \/>\n           assessment year 1997-98, is illegally sustainable in<br \/>\n           the eyes of law?&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>           Answered accordingly. Resultantly, the instant appeal<\/p>\n<p>is allowed and the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate<\/p>\n<p>Tribunal   10.6.2005   assessing   the   appellant-assessee   under<\/p>\n<p>Section 171 of the Income Tax Act is hereby set aside.<\/p>\n<p>                                            [J.S.KHEHAR]<br \/>\n                                                  JUDGE<\/p>\n<p>                                            [NAWAB SINGH]<br \/>\n                                                JUDGE<br \/>\n20.01.2009<br \/>\nSKaushik\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Punjab-Haryana High Court M\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And &#8230; on 20 January, 2009 ITA NO.30 OF 2006 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA NO.30 OF 2006 Date of decision: 20.01.2009 M\/s Tirlochan Singh &#8230;&#8230;.Appellant versus Commissioner of Income Tax and another &#8230;&#8230;Respondents CORAM: HON&#8217;BLE MR. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-159530","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And ... on 20 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And ... on 20 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-01-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-31T21:51:57+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And &#8230; on 20 January, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-01-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-31T21:51:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2734,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And ... on 20 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-01-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-31T21:51:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And &#8230; on 20 January, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And ... on 20 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And ... on 20 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-01-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-31T21:51:57+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And &#8230; on 20 January, 2009","datePublished":"2009-01-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-31T21:51:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009"},"wordCount":2734,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009","name":"M\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And ... on 20 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-01-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-31T21:51:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-tirlochan-singh-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-and-on-20-january-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S Tirlochan Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And &#8230; on 20 January, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159530","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=159530"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159530\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=159530"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=159530"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=159530"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}