1978 (12) TMI 87

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and this was divided equally between the two sons, the appellants herein. It was contended before the ITO that the sum of Rs. 6,000 was invested in M/s Shilpe Electricals, a partnership firm consisting of the two appellants as partners and since the capital contribution came out of the ancestral funds, the share income from the partnership firm should be assessed in the hands of the appellants in the status of HUF. The ITO came to the conclusion that the declaration has not been attested by any witness and even the contents of the declaration cannot be verified since the appellants' father, who made the declaration, has died and in the absence of evidence to show that the investment made by the appellants in the partnership firm came out of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e failed to establish the truth and genuineness of these recitals made in the declaration and the partnership deed and in the circumstances, the status has been correctly taken as individual and not HUF. In support of this contention, the learned departmental representative relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Durga Prasad More.(1) 6. The AAC has recorded a finding that the appellants' father was in the same line of business at Calcutta and a firm called Sampath Electricals was the family, business run at Calcutta by the appellants' father. The appellants' father's financial capacity to provide a sum of Rs. 6,000 to his two sons cannot, therefore, be doubted. The father has left a declaration that the sum of Rs. 6,000 l....