TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (2) TMI 39
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t years, viz., 1978-79 and 1979-80. The points involved are common and the following two questions of law have been referred to us at the instance of the Department : "1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the interest credited to the accounts of the family members of the assessee-Hindu undivided family is not liable to be included in the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... held that the partial partition claimed by the assessee was valid and the amount set apart under the said partition did not belong to the assessee-family. The Appellate Tribunal followed its earlier orders and rejected the appeal by the Department. The earlier order of the Appellate Tribunal in the assessee's own case, was the subject-matter of consideration before this court in CIT/CWT/CGT v. S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vidual status. The Income-tax Officer, denied the benefit of deduction under section 80L of the Act, because the assessee had a member who had more than the taxable income in his individual assessment, and the assessee was a specified Hindu undivided family. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner as well as the Appellate Tribunal held that as one of the members of the family, SM. M. Muthappa Chettia....