Clubbing of a minor daughter's partnership share under income tax was rejected by following binding precedent.

The Court treated an earlier identical decision as binding and held that the share of the assessee's minor daughter from firms where he acted as karta could not be included in his total income under section 64(1)(ii). The connected referred questions were also disposed of by following the companion decision delivered the same day, with those questions answered in favour of the Revenue. The reference was thus answered partly for the assessee and partly for the Revenue, but the clubbing issue was decided against inclusion in the assessee's income.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the share of the assessee's minor daughter from firms in which he was a partner in his representative capacity as karta of a Hindu undivided family could be included in his total income under section 64(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. (ii) Whether the connected referred questions covered by the earlier decision in a companion reference were to be answered in favour of the Revenue.

Issue (i): Whether the share of the assessee's minor daughter from firms in which he was a partner in his representative capacity as karta of a Hindu undivided family could be included in his total income under section 64(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The point was concluded by an earlier decision of the same Court on the identical statutory question. The Court treated itself as bound by that precedent and applied it to the present facts.

Conclusion: The share of the minor daughter could not be included in the assessee's total income. The issue was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

Issue (ii): Whether the connected referred questions covered by the earlier decision in a companion reference were to be answered in favour of the Revenue.

Analysis: Those questions were stated to be covered by the Court's decision in the companion matter decided the same day, and were disposed of by following that ruling.

Conclusion: The connected questions were answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered partly in favour of the assessee and partly in favour of the Revenue, with the principal controversy on clubbing of the minor daughter's share decided against inclusion in the assessee's income.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an identical legal issue has already been decided by the same Court, the later Bench is bound to follow that precedent unless it is overruled by a higher court.

---