https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25889 The High Court held that the disputed property did not belong to the Hindu undivided family (HUF) but remained the individual asset of the assessee, a practicing advocate. The income from the property should be assessed as the individual income of the assessee. The Court did not address the issue of admitting fresh evidence, deeming it academic. The judgment favored the Revenue, with no costs awarded due to the death of the assessee. The case outcome directed a copy of the judgment to be transmitted to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna. en-us Mon, 08 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:40:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25889 The High Court held that the disputed property did not belong to the Hindu undivided family (HUF) but remained the individual asset of the assessee, a practicing advocate. The income from the property should be assessed as the individual income of the assessee. The Court did not address the issue of admitting fresh evidence, deeming it academic. The judgment favored the Revenue, with no costs awarded due to the death of the assessee. The case outcome directed a copy of the judgment to be transmitted to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 08 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25889