https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55157 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, determining that the Commissioner lacked jurisdiction under Section 263 as the original order did not merge with the AAC's order regarding the sum of Rs. 57,196. It upheld the validity of the partial partition and agreement, finding them genuine and effective under Hindu law. The Tribunal ruled that the sum of Rs. 57,196 was not the assessee's income due to diversion by overriding title. Additionally, it held that the business was not conducted by an Association of Persons (AOP), contrary to the Commissioner's assertion. The Tribunal canceled the Commissioner's order under Section 263, ruling in favor of the assessee. en-us Sat, 17 Apr 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:13:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55157 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, determining that the Commissioner lacked jurisdiction under Section 263 as the original order did not merge with the AAC's order regarding the sum of Rs. 57,196. It upheld the validity of the partial partition and agreement, finding them genuine and effective under Hindu law. The Tribunal ruled that the sum of Rs. 57,196 was not the assessee's income due to diversion by overriding title. Additionally, it held that the business was not conducted by an Association of Persons (AOP), contrary to the Commissioner's assertion. The Tribunal canceled the Commissioner's order under Section 263, ruling in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 17 Apr 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55157