TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1988 (8) TMI 148
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f) and it is for this reason that the number of these appeals for three years alone has swollen to nine. 3. We have heard the learned representatives on both sides at length. 4. Little interesting, although short, the facts of the case are simple and very few. Appellant's minor sons (in these appeals only one son) were deriving income from their share in a partnership firm during the three relevant assessment years, namely, 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79. No return of income was, however, filed by the assessee clubbing the minor's income as envisaged by section 64(1)(iii) of the Act. 5. Invoking the provisions of section 147, assessments for all these years were completed on 16th November, 1982 by the Income-tax Officer whereby the m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 8. To the first plea, learned Appellate Asstt. Commissioner took the view that it could not be elaborated on behalf of the appellant as to what was the logistic of the bona fide impression on account of which the assessee was prevented from declaring the minor's income and that no decisions could be cited on behalf of the assessee in support thereof. The second plea was annulled by the Commissioner (Appeals) by placing reliance on a decision of the jurisdictional High Court in Navayuga Traders Gunnies Firm v. CIT [1971] 79 ITR 519 (AP) wherein it has been held that the penalty proceedings initiated even after the completion of the assessments were valid. Be that as it may, only the first contention enumerated above remains for our consi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....so urged that the law on the subject was very uncertain which was manifest from the Special Bench decision of this Tribunal in ITO v. S. Krishna Iyer [1982] 2 ITD 595 (Mad.). In this case it was held that for the applicability of section 64(1)(iii) the condition precedent was that the parent should have "total income" apart from minor child's income from a firm which could be computed under the Act meaning thereby that if a parent had no income of his own despite his minor son being admitted to the benefits of a partnership and receiving his share's income therefrom, the same could not be included/assessed in the hands of the assessee. It also appears pertinent to state that the Special Bench decision was necessitated only in view of the co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecisions of the Tribunal resulting in the Full Bench decision in S. Krishna Iyer's case which was negatived by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Sivalel Sogaji's case go only to strengthen the assessee's stand making it possible to tilt a finding by us in his favour. To say the least, it cannot be said that the assessee's impression on the issue was based on jejune grounds and, therefore, without any legal basis whatsoever. In our view, the assessee was basking under a bona fide impression and/or confusion which is evidenced by the various subsequent decisions both rendered by the Tribunal and High Court whereby he was reasonably halted from returning the income earned by his minor children. In fact, the assessee's case to get succour is fur....