https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16603 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that the income earned by the spouse of an individual from a firm where the individual is a partner in a representative capacity should not be clubbed in the individual's income under section 64(1) of the Income Tax Act. Citing relevant precedents, the court emphasized that if an individual acts as a partner in a firm as the Karta of their Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), the income accruing to their spouse from the same firm cannot be included in the individual's total income. The court found the Tribunal's decision to be erroneous and sided with the assessee against the Revenue. en-us Tue, 25 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:25:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16603 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that the income earned by the spouse of an individual from a firm where the individual is a partner in a representative capacity should not be clubbed in the individual's income under section 64(1) of the Income Tax Act. Citing relevant precedents, the court emphasized that if an individual acts as a partner in a firm as the Karta of their Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), the income accruing to their spouse from the same firm cannot be included in the individual's total income. The court found the Tribunal's decision to be erroneous and sided with the assessee against the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 25 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16603