1984 (10) TMI 117

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....was jointly won by Shri P. Sadasivam and Shri K.A. Easwaran of Komarapalayam. The first prize was of Rs. 1,25,000 and the ticket which was purchased jointly by these two persons was ticket No. HE-235797 of Himachal Pradesh. The prize was won in the draw held on 19-1-1982 and a copy of the certificate of the Canara Bank had been produced before the ITO to show that the two persons had deposited the ticket for recovery of the prize amount. The assessee had relied on an order of the Tribunal in the case of A.U. Chandrasekharan [IT Appeal No. 1008 (Mad.) of 1978-79, dated 21-6-1979] to claim that they could not be assessed as an AOP and each of the individuals should be separately assessed. The ITO did not agree, holding that there was a joint ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of course, according to the ratio of the Madras High Court, cannot be equated to that of an AOP. The Court held that the concept of 'BOI' excludes the crucial characteristics of an AOP, such as for instance, a common intention and a common activity to produce taxable income. There is also the observation that persons who do nothing but stand and wait may not be an AOP ; but, they may yet be a BOI, if they stand together, and wait for something to be shared between them. The case before the Madras High Court was one where a family group carried on business consequent to certain testamentary devolutions. The Court observed, while upholding the status of BOI in that case, as under : "... What is more, the object which united them economica....