TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (6) TMI 28
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red by G. C. MITAL, ACTG. C. J.-The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, has referred the following question for the opinion of this court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the share income of Talu Ram from Ganesh Factory should be assessed in the hands of Talu Ram, HUF and not Talu Ram, individual ?" T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtial partition of the capital of Rs. 23,852 which stood invested in the aforesaid firm. Talu Ram, his wife and two sons were allotted one-fourth share in the partial partition. The Hindu undivided family's share in the building and machinery was kept joint. The dispute has arisen with regard to one-fourth share allotted to Talu Ram in the partial partition effected on October 1, 1966, as to wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner and the Tribunal decided in favour of the assessee on the basis of certain decided cases. That is how the question of law has been referred. On a consideration of the matter, we are of the view that the facts of the case are identical with the facts of CIT v. K. Satyanarayan Murty [1984] 147 ITR 140, a decision of the Division Bench of the Orissa High Court. The following dictum was laid do....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the smaller Hindu undivided family. One can understand that if a karta effects a partial partition with his sons, grandsons and great grandsons, the share allotted to his sons may be considered to belong to their Hindu undivided family. In this case, on October 1, 1966, there was a partial partition of the assets in a business by the father of Talu Ram and his two sons and the share which came....