https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25798 The High Court of Madhya Pradesh ruled against the assessee in interpreting section 64(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court held that if a minor's income is linked to partnership benefits, it must be included in the parent's total income, regardless of the source of investment. Emphasizing the nature of the investment as capital, not a loan, the court rejected the Tribunal's decision to remand the case for source verification. The judgment clarifies the importance of the nexus between a minor's income and their partnership benefits for tax liability determination. en-us Wed, 16 Jul 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Feb 2010 10:15:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25798 The High Court of Madhya Pradesh ruled against the assessee in interpreting section 64(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court held that if a minor's income is linked to partnership benefits, it must be included in the parent's total income, regardless of the source of investment. Emphasizing the nature of the investment as capital, not a loan, the court rejected the Tribunal's decision to remand the case for source verification. The judgment clarifies the importance of the nexus between a minor's income and their partnership benefits for tax liability determination. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 16 Jul 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25798