TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Assessment of Hindu Undivided Family for Super Tax based on Business Purpose</h1> <h3>The Secretary to the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M. Doraiswami Aiyengar and Brothers</h3> The court determined that unless the registered firm operated for the benefit of the joint family, it could be assessed as an undivided Hindu family for ... - Issues:Assessment of a registered firm as an undivided Hindu family for super tax under the Income Tax Act and Super Tax Act.Analysis:The case involved a question of whether the assessees, a registered firm, could be assessed as an undivided Hindu family for super tax. The specific questions raised were whether the registration of the firm precludes assessment of the family as an undivided family to super tax and whether the constitution of a partnership within the family affects the assessment. The court sought more information regarding the origin of the firm's capital, specifically if it was derived from joint family funds. The Commissioner's response indicated a lack of conclusive evidence on this matter. The court emphasized that the intention to trade as a joint family and the actual conduct of trading as such were crucial factors. The court highlighted that members of a joint family could engage in trade using joint family funds or conduct trade independently without involving joint family property. The court noted that the mere investment of joint family funds in a trade does not necessarily make it a joint family business. The court emphasized that the determination of whether the business was conducted on behalf of the joint family was a question of fact primarily for the Commissioner to decide.The court answered the questions posed by stating that unless the registered firm was shown to carry on its business for the benefit of the joint family, it could be assessed as an undivided Hindu family for super tax. The court clarified that the mere constitution of a partnership within the family would not automatically preclude assessment if the partnership operated for the benefit of the joint family. As the court could not reach a final determination based on the available materials, no order was made regarding costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
