https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6907 A business started in the name of an individual coparcener is not presumed to be joint family property merely because joint family funds exist elsewhere. The controlling test is whether there was a clear intention to abandon exclusive ownership and blend the business with the family estate; that intention may be inferred only from relevant circumstances. On the facts stated, the use of joint family money in the business did not, by itself, establish blending, and a later partition decree could not alter the position for the assessment year in question. The business retained its individual character. en-us Thu, 03 Feb 1966 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Feb 2009 08:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6907 A business started in the name of an individual coparcener is not presumed to be joint family property merely because joint family funds exist elsewhere. The controlling test is whether there was a clear intention to abandon exclusive ownership and blend the business with the family estate; that intention may be inferred only from relevant circumstances. On the facts stated, the use of joint family money in the business did not, by itself, establish blending, and a later partition decree could not alter the position for the assessment year in question. The business retained its individual character. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 03 Feb 1966 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6907