1985 (11) TMI 37

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....idated order, we propose to answer the common question referred in these references. D.B.I.T. Reference No. 24 of 1978 relates to the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67. D.B.I.T. Reference No. 39 of 1980 is in respect of the assessment years 1967-68 to 1978-79. D.B.I.T. References Nos. 26 of 1978, 17 of 1984 and 49 of 1980, relate to the assessment years 1966-67,1970-71, 1971-72 and 1972-73 r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... counsel for the parties submits that a Division Bench of this court in Gulraj Poonamchand v. CIT [1984] 148 ITR 326 after considering the arguments and submissions made on behalf of the Revenue and the assessee and after going through the various authorities cited by them, held as under (at p. 331) : "In our view, it is permissible for a karta of a HUF representing the Hindu undivided family t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....his connection, to which reference may be made is Lachhman Das v. CIT [1948] 16 ITR 35 (PC), wherein it was laid down that there can be a valid partnership between a karta of a Hindu undivided family representing the family on the one hand and a member of that family in his individual capacity on the other. It may be mentioned that a somewhat similar view was taken in CIT v. Mariappa Muthiriyar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he joint family or coparcenary, acquire separate property and run independent partnership business for themselves. In that connection, reliance was placed on R. C. Mitter & Sons v. CIT [1959] 36 ITR 194 (SC) and Ladhu Ram Taparia v. CIT [1962] 44 ITR 521 (SC). Mr. B. R. Arora, learned counsel for the Revenue is quite fair in submitting that the answer to the question involved in these cases, wi....