https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69761 For income-tax purposes, share income from a firm allotted to an individual on family partition was not treated as HUF income where the alleged omitted asset had no factual or legal basis. The right to share profits was regarded as the partner's own property, and the post-partition income arose to the assessee individually. The text also states that a sole coparcener receiving property on partition is the absolute owner until another coparcener exists, and a husband and wife alone do not constitute a Hindu undivided family in relation to that property. Accordingly, the income was assessable in the individual's hands. en-us Fri, 22 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:05:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69761 For income-tax purposes, share income from a firm allotted to an individual on family partition was not treated as HUF income where the alleged omitted asset had no factual or legal basis. The right to share profits was regarded as the partner's own property, and the post-partition income arose to the assessee individually. The text also states that a sole coparcener receiving property on partition is the absolute owner until another coparcener exists, and a husband and wife alone do not constitute a Hindu undivided family in relation to that property. Accordingly, the income was assessable in the individual's hands. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 22 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69761