Satish Kumar Mittal, J. - (1.) THIS order shall dispose of six Income Tax appeals, bearing I.T.A. Nos. 178, 179, 246, 249, 247 and 248 of 2007, which are arising from a common order dated June 16, 2006, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as "the ITAT"), in six appeals, i.e., I.T.A. Nos. 644 to 649 (ASR.)/2004, pertaining to the assessment years 1996 -97 to 2001 -02, whereby the appeals filed by the assessee have been dismissed.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that on November 27, 2001, notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") in the case of Shri Sajiv Vohra, individual, were issued for the assessment years 1997 -98 to 2000 -01 for the reason that various investments made by him did not stand reflected in the original returns filed by him in his individual capacity. He was required to explain the investment made by him in acquisition of plot and purchase of Kisan Vikas Patras, etc. He was also asked to explain the source of deposits made by him in various bank accounts with reference to the capital brought forward as on April 1,1995. His capital account for the period June 27, 1991, to March 31, 1995, also revealed that he had credited the following income in his capital account as "by other income": 1. 31 -3 -1992 777,000 2. 31 -3 -1993 1,00,000 3. 31 -3 -1994 1,00,000 4. 31 -3 -1995 75,000 After receipt of the aforesaid notices on March 31, 2002, returns in the status of Hindu undivided family were filed by the assessee. These were find by the Assessing Officer as non est being belated. Thereafter, on March 27, 2003, the Income Tax Officer, Gurdaspur, recorded his reasons to believe that the income had escaped assessment. In these reasons, it was stated that the assessee had made investments in KVPs, etc., in his own name and in the names of his family members and that during reassessment proceedings in the status of individual, Shri Sajiv Vohra had stated that all investments stood in the hands of his Hindu undivided family. The assessments in the status of individual were completed on March 28, 2003. In these assessments, additions were made, observing that in case Shri Vohra was able to prove the assessment, being in the hands of the Hindu undivided family, the additions in the status of individual would be protective else they would be treated as substantive. These assessments were not challenged and they attained finality.
(3.) THE Assessing Officer in the order dated March 16, 2004, for the assessment year 1996 -97 concluded that in fact, no Hindu undivided family existed and the business was the individual business of Shri Vohra. However, income was assessed in the hands of the Hindu undivided family on a protective basis since the return had been filed in the status of Hindu undivided family.;