TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal had material before it to conclude that the firm E.A.E.T. Sundararaj & Co. was not a genuine firm but only a benami firm for the Hindu undivided family.
Analysis: The question was examined on the factual matrix: partners were the wives of family members; initial capital was provided by the Hindu undivided family with partners' capital introduced later; the firm carried on a business in the same line and premises as the family and used the same telegraphic address; partners lacked business experience while the karta managed and conducted the firm's transactions and correspondence; accounts did not show withdrawal of profits by the partners; the cumulative effect of these factors was evaluated rather than any single circumstance in isolation. The Tribunal applied the test of beneficial ownership of profits and considered whether the partners in fact enjoyed the firm's profits, and assessed probability and factual nexus between the firm and the family in light of human probabilities and the surrounding circumstances.
Conclusion: The Tribunal had material to conclude that the firm was benami for the Hindu undivided family; the reference is answered in the affirmative against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
