https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66914 The tribunal determined that the share incomes from the firm should be assessed as individual incomes rather than as Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) incomes. The tribunal emphasized that the incomes were not derived from joint family funds and did not have the character of joint family property. Despite the preliminary objection raised by the departmental representative, the tribunal decided to address the appeals on their merits. The tribunal applied tests laid down by the Supreme Court to assess if the income could be considered HUF income, ultimately concluding that the incomes were individual incomes. The appeals were dismissed. en-us Thu, 03 Oct 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Mar 2011 11:20:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66914 The tribunal determined that the share incomes from the firm should be assessed as individual incomes rather than as Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) incomes. The tribunal emphasized that the incomes were not derived from joint family funds and did not have the character of joint family property. Despite the preliminary objection raised by the departmental representative, the tribunal decided to address the appeals on their merits. The tribunal applied tests laid down by the Supreme Court to assess if the income could be considered HUF income, ultimately concluding that the incomes were individual incomes. The appeals were dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 03 Oct 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66914