IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITR No. 5 of 2006 Date of Decision: 25.11.2010 Smt. Surjit Kaur (HUF) ....Petitioner. Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: None. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. Following questions of law have been referred for opinion of this Court under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal arising out of its order dated 24.12.1986 in ITA Nos. 433 & 487/ASR/1986 for the assessment years 1981-82 and 1982-83: “(i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that Sh. Swaraj Singh could not leave his self acquired property for his HUF by his will although such an HUF had no property prior to his death? (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in ignoring by the rule of consistency although no resjudicata is strictly applicable to income-tax proceedings? ITR No. 5 of 2006 -2- (iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the property left by Sh. Swaraj Singh did not belong to the HUF of his wife and children despite their conduct of treating the same as HUF property right from assessment year 1961-62 assessment and department accepting the position upto 1980-81 assessment? 2. On the last date i.e. on 3.3.2010 it was noted that the assessee failed to file three copies of printed paper-book. Even thereafter, no further steps have been taken by the assessee. 3. Since none appears for the assessee to press the reference, the reference is returned unanswered. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE November 25, 2010 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE