https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15709 The Supreme Court held that the income of minor sons from a partnership firm, where the assessee was a partner representing his Hindu undivided family, should not be included in the individual income of the assessee. The court clarified that section 64 does not apply to the share income of the karta from the partnership firm and emphasized that the income earned by the karta is taxed in the hands of the Hindu undivided family. This decision provided clarity on tax liability concerning income from partnership firms in the context of Hindu undivided families. en-us Thu, 12 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15709 The Supreme Court held that the income of minor sons from a partnership firm, where the assessee was a partner representing his Hindu undivided family, should not be included in the individual income of the assessee. The court clarified that section 64 does not apply to the share income of the karta from the partnership firm and emphasized that the income earned by the karta is taxed in the hands of the Hindu undivided family. This decision provided clarity on tax liability concerning income from partnership firms in the context of Hindu undivided families. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 12 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15709