1980 (3) TMI 171

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the HUF consisting of himself and his minor son. From 1st April, 1975 he entered into a partnership with a stranger and his minor son was admitted to the benefits of the partnership. Since the business initially belonged to him in his individual capacity, the income from business was considered includible in his individual hands under s. 64(2)(b) of the IT Act, 1961. In the same view, the share income from the partnership amounting to Rs. 12,775 was also assessable. As regards the share income falling to his minor son, Ravishankar, admitted to the benefits of partnership, the share income of Rs. 9,598 was sought to be assessed under s. 64(1)(iii) of the Act on the footing that the assessee was a partner in the same firm. Both the additions ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....laim of the Departmental Representative that not all the relevant facts are clear from the orders of the authorities or his other view that we should follow the judgment of the High Courts favourable to the Revenue on this issue. The assessee succeeds on this point. The inclusion of Rs. 9,598 as share income of minor son Ravishankar is deleted. This will be assessable only in his (Minor's) hands for this year. As for the Life Insurance premia paid by the HUF out of its share income from M/s Abarana Maligai, an income which has already been included in the hands of the assessee in his individual capacity under s. 64(2)(b), we are of the view that it will be inconsistent on our part to confirm the inclusion of income and deny the relief under....