https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235401 Section 64(1A) of the Income-tax Act, which clubs a minor child's income with a parent's income, was upheld as a valid anti-avoidance measure. The HC held that the provision did not violate Article 14 because fiscal classifications enjoy a strong presumption of constitutionality and the distinction drawn for minors had a rational nexus with preventing tax diversion and duplication of benefits. It also upheld clause (a) of the Explanation, which attributes the income to the parent with the greater total income, finding no inconsistency with section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act since both parents are recognised as natural guardians. en-us Thu, 22 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Oct 2013 18:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235401 Section 64(1A) of the Income-tax Act, which clubs a minor child's income with a parent's income, was upheld as a valid anti-avoidance measure. The HC held that the provision did not violate Article 14 because fiscal classifications enjoy a strong presumption of constitutionality and the distinction drawn for minors had a rational nexus with preventing tax diversion and duplication of benefits. It also upheld clause (a) of the Explanation, which attributes the income to the parent with the greater total income, finding no inconsistency with section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act since both parents are recognised as natural guardians. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 22 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235401