{"id":62641,"date":"1986-10-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1986-10-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986"},"modified":"2016-04-17T23:25:00","modified_gmt":"2016-04-17T17:55:00","slug":"mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986","title":{"rendered":"Mahendra Garg (P.) Family … vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986"},"content":{"rendered":"
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Delhi<\/div>\n
Mahendra Garg (P.) Family … vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1987 20 ITD 392 Delhi<\/div>\n
Bench: S Grover, B Gupta<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER–Assessment made without proper enquiry. <\/p>\n
Ratio & Held:\n<\/p>\n
 The assessments admittedly having been completed in one hearing only and without requiring the presence of the settlor of the trust, a notice under section 263 was rightly issued as the Commissioner was of the opinion that assessments were made in haste and without proper and adequate enquiries and, therefore, these were erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.\n<\/p>\n
Application:\n<\/p>\n
 Also to current assessment years.\n<\/p>\n
Income Tax Act 1961 s.263 <\/p>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
S. Grover, Judicial Member<\/p>\n
1. These two second appeals are directed against the common order dated 22-11-1984 passed by the Commissioner, Agra under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) vacating the assessments framed on 25-11-1982 on returned incomes of Rs. 35,073 and Rs. 42,230 in the status of an AOP in respect of the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81, respectively. The assessee filed returns in the name and style of Mahendra Garg (P.) Family Specific Trust, Noorigate Agra on  3-2-1982 declaring   incomes as stated  above.\n<\/p>\n
In respect of the assessment year 1979-80 the following entries in the order sheet were made by the ITO before completing assessment :\n<\/p>\n
  23-11-1982                       Issue notice under Section 143(2)\n                                                           Sd\/-ITO\n25-11-1982                  Shri D.K. Agarwal, CA attends. Copy of\n                            trust deed filed. Discussed. Assessed.\n                            Sd\/- ITO\n \n \n\n<\/pre>\n
2.  From the pattern  of assessments and the  sequence  of events, the Commissioner opined that the entries showed that the books of account of   the   trust   were never produced before the ITO which could  be scrutinised to check up the correctness of the claims regarding  trust income and its activities. The  Commissioner  also took notice of the fact that no tick marks whatsoever had been made on any of the papers filed  along with returns  and  the ITO had  not obtained the copies of capital accounts of the beneficiaries and had also not scrutinised the same. The  assessments  admittedly having been completed in one hearing only and without requiring the presence of the settlor of the trust,  a notice under Section 263 was issued  on 26-10-1984 as the Commissioner was of the opinion that assessments were made in haste and without proper and adequate enquiries and, therefore, these were erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue requiring the assessee to show cause  as to why the assessments  completed in  a hurry and without proper scrutiny should not be set aside with directions to redo the same from the stage of filing the returns after giving the trust a reasonable opportunity of being heard.\n<\/p>\n
3.  The  date  of hearing was fixed  for 2-11-1984 when a telegram was received for adjournment. Shri  Mahendra Garg and  Smt.  Usha Devi, trustees   were   informed   by   the   Commissioner’s    office   vide letter dated 5-11-1984, served on the said trustees on 12-11-1984, that they were allowed    to   file   written   arguments by  19-11-1984. Neither anybody attended nor any reply was filed till 19-11-1984, as stated by the Commissioner in his order, who proceeded to dispose of the proceedings initiated under Section 263 on the basis of evidence available on record.\n<\/p>\n
4.  Reproduction of paragraph 2 of the Commissioner’s order gives us the facts as also indicate the evidence on record and project that certain essential  documents and  evidence which normally are taken on record for completing assessments, were not there  and   the  ITO did  nothing even to complete bare formalities much less process the returns as is required :\n<\/p>\n
 Assessee Mahendra Garg (P.) Family Specific Trust, Noorigate, Agra claimed to have come into existence with effect from 17-7-1977 by a trust deed executed by Smt. Premwati wife of Shri Gulab Chand, resident of Church Road, Agra, as settlor who set aside a sum of Rs. 500 for the benefit of Smt. Usha Devi wife of Shri Mahendra Garg, son of Shri Sriram, Master Umesh Garg, Master Vikas Garg and Master Navin Garg sons of Shri Mahendra Garg. Shri Mahendra Garg son of Shri Sriram, resident of 15\/92, Noorigate, Agra and Smt. Usha Devi wife of Shri Mahendra Garg resident of 15\/92, Noorigate, Agra have been appointed as the trustees of the trust. The returns have been signed by Shri Mahendra Garg, the trustee of the trust. The incomes shown in the returns have been considered exempt on the ground that the trust is a specific trust and, therefore, the incomes in the hands of the trust are exempt and the shares should be considered in the hands of the beneficiaries under Section 161 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The trust filed copies of trading and profit and loss account and balance sheet. The copies of capital accounts of the beneficiaries have not been filed in either of the years. The commodity of trading has been shown as Gilet ornaments and commission from PIC. How and in what manner and with what capital the trust conducted its business relating to the Gilet ornaments is not at all clear from the papers filed. The ITO has not cared to examine whether the incomes shown to have been earned by the trust really belonged to it or to the persons who had earned this income by their personal efforts. The ITO has not cared to obtain the details of commission from the assessee. No certificate of commission is available on the record. The ITO has not tried to obtain the same from the assessee, for the verification of the correctness and the source.\n<\/p>\n
5.  From the entries made in the order sheet it has already been projected that the ITO issued notice under Section 143(2) of the Act on 23-11-1982. The implication  of such notice is important because it is required to be issued only if the ITO is not satisfied about the correctness of the return filed and considers it necessary or expedient to verify the correctness and completeness of the returns by requiring the presence of the assessee  or the  production of evidence in this behalf. The relevant provision in this regard are contained in Clause (b) of Sub-section (2) of Section 143  as follows :\n<\/p>\n
(2) Where a return has been made under Section 139, and–\n<\/p>\n
 (a) **                   **                      **<\/p>\n
(b) whether or not an assessment has been made under Sub-section (1), the Income-tax Officer considers it necessary or expedient to verify the correctness and completeness of the return by requiring the presence of the assessee or the production of evidence in this behalf ;\n<\/p>\n
the Income-tax Officer shall serve on the assessee a notice requiring him, on a date to be therein specified, either to attend at the Income-tax Officer’s office or to produce, or to cause to be there produced, any evidence on which the assessee may rely in support of the return.:\n<\/p>\n
6.  On  25-11-1982 Shri  S.K. Agarwal,  chartered accountant filed a copy of the trust deed but no other documents as pointed by the Commissioner, like copies of the capital accounts of the beneficiaries and the  source of funds by which the business was conducted etc., etc. On the abovestated facts the assessments  were certainly erroneous. The absence of   vital evidence for completion  of assessments  coupled  with the fact that the settlor settled only a sum of Rs. 500 and that the income returns were very substantial naturally indicated that the assessments were prejudicial to the interests of revenue and, therefore, the Commissioner’s invoking of powers under Section 263 cannot be said to be unjustified or wrong.\n<\/p>\n
7. Shri C.S.  Agarwal,  advocate stated     that the trustees had shown the net income in trust’s returns and filed all the details, i.e., trading account, profit and  loss account, profit and loss allocation account, balance sheet, opening stock list, closing stock list, sundry debtors list, interest received details, commission received  details, the beneficiaries’  capital account, details of expenses and other details as asked by the ITO  at the time of assessment. Required to substantiate his averment of having filed the documents in view of the learned Commissioner’s assertion in paragraph 2 of his order, which we have reproduced above, Shri Agarwal stated that such details were filed in other similar cases and, therefore, presumption was in the assessee’s favour. He also was not in a position to explain the assessee’s stand vis-a-vis, the entries made on 25-11-1982 when the ITO stated that only trust deed  copy was filed. In  relation to the learned Commissioner’s  observation that  there was no response to the notice served on 12-11-1984. Shri Agarwal  stated that representation  was not made because according to  the assessee, the learned Commissioner was sitting with a closed mind and no useful purpose could have been  served. The learned  advocate was not in a position to elaborate this statement in view of the fact that the Commissioner, was passed the impugned order, was in his post only for short time. Shri Agarwal also very strongly argued that on 24-11-1982 the assessee had filed a letter dated 24-11-1982 before the ITO which gave all  the details like names and addresses of beneficiaries,  name   and address of trustee, settlor’s relation with the beneficiaries, etc., as also allocation of profit and loss between beneficiaries. A copy of the said letter is given to us at pages  14 to  16. It may be mentioned here that in the said letter trust fund is stated to  Rs.  500 and other contents reveal that   necessary vital information was not   filed with the return. Since  the  letter was not even marked by the   ITO it  only goes to prove the Commissioner’s assertion that the ITO did not apply his mind, neither had any material to frame the assessments.\n<\/p>\n
8. For the assessee copies of accounts of the beneficiaries were sought to be placed before us for the two years under appeal, but since the same were not established to have had been filed before the ITO we have not accepted such documents as forming part of the record. Shri Agarwal also made part of his paper book copies of Tribunal orders in certain family trust cases of Agra and submitted that the present case being similar, the Tribunal orders should be followed. We, however, find the facts in the present case to be peculiar and, therefore, find no guidance from those orders.\n<\/p>\n
9.  For the revenue Shri K.K. Sharma in reply very effectively supported the Commissioner’s order and submitted that  on  the facts there could be no other  approach then the one taken by the learned Commissioner. He particularly emphasised that the Commissioner’s version that accounts of beneficiaries  had  not  been  filed was not even    attempted    to   be controverted for the assessee.\n<\/p>\n
10.  In rejoinder Shri Agarwal  persisted that copies of capital accounts of the beneficiaries were on the ITO’s record. On a query from the Bench Shri Agarwal  insisted  that there was no rule which provided that if the Commissioner makes wrong  statement   the assessee must rebut by an affidavit.   However,   except   making bald assertion Shri   Agarwal was unable to establish the existence of said  documents on record. In the alternative Shri  Agarwal  also  submitted that at best  non-filing of the documents, as stated in the Commissioner’s order, was an error.\n<\/p>\n
11.  Alternative contentions are not strange bed fellows but sometime these have the effect of diluting and demolishing  the  case altogether. It would be strange if a motorist is to say that he was cautiously driving at the time of accident and alternatively he was miles away from the scene of accident. Shri  Agarwal’s   contentions are also similar in   character, inasmuch as, he primarily insisted that the documents were on record and in the alternative that non-submission was at best an error.\n<\/p>\n
12.  In view of all the facts, therefore, we are of the considered view that the Commissioner rightly vacated the assessments  of 25-11-1982 and directing de novo assessments from the stage of filing of the returns.\n<\/p>\n
13.  In the result, appeals dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
B. Gupta, Accountant Member<\/p>\n
1. Ordinarily I would have fallen in line with the decisions of the Tribunal Delhi Benches in the cases of Gauri Shanker (P.) Family Trust [IT Appeal Nos. 5332, 5333 and 5334, dated 19-3-1985] and Mukand Family Trust [IT Appeal Nos. 5193 to 5195, dated 25-6-1985] on which the learned authorised counsel of the assessee has placed reliance and by which the orders of the Commissioner, passed under Section 263 had been cancelled but I find that the facts in the present case are significantly distinguishable. Since the learned authorised counsel for the assessee has not been able to establish that the material\/details as mentioned in paragraph 2 of the Commissioner’s order had been furnished before the ITO before he completed the assessment and since the assessee had failed to furnish any reply to the show-cause notice issued by the Commissioner prior to the passing of the impugned order under Section 263, I would agree with the conclusion arrived at by the learned Judicial Member in the special facts and circumstances of the case.\n<\/p>\n
2. The appeals by the assessee fail and are hereby dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Delhi Mahendra Garg (P.) Family … vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986 Equivalent citations: 1987 20 ITD 392 Delhi Bench: S Grover, B Gupta ORDER–Assessment made without proper enquiry. Ratio & Held: The assessments admittedly having been completed in one hearing only and without requiring the presence of the […]<\/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":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-62641","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nMahendra Garg (P.) Family ... vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mahendra Garg (P.) Family ... vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1986-10-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-04-17T17:55:00+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mahendra Garg (P.) Family … vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986\",\"datePublished\":\"1986-10-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-17T17:55:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986\"},\"wordCount\":2151,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986\",\"name\":\"Mahendra Garg (P.) Family ... vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1986-10-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-17T17:55:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mahendra Garg (P.) Family … vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986\"}]},{\"@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":"Mahendra Garg (P.) Family ... vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mahendra Garg (P.) Family ... vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1986-10-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-04-17T17:55:00+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mahendra Garg (P.) Family … vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986","datePublished":"1986-10-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-17T17:55:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986"},"wordCount":2151,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986","name":"Mahendra Garg (P.) Family ... vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1986-10-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-17T17:55:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahendra-garg-p-family-vs-income-tax-officer-on-24-october-1986#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mahendra Garg (P.) Family … vs Income-Tax Officer on 24 October, 1986"}]},{"@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\/62641","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=62641"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62641\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=62641"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=62641"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=62641"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}