TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1978 (1) TMI 41
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....TISH CHANDRA J.-This reference relates to assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-1971, the relevant previous years being the financial years. Sri V. K. Purwar, the assessee, was in service in the firm of Messrs. Govind Ram Gajadhar Lal. There was a partition in this firm in October/November, 1966, whereafter this firm was converted into a partnership firm. Sri V. K. Purwar became a partner. The shar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... income from this firm was shown in the return filed as karta. The ITO, relying mainly on his previous orders, repelled the claim of the HUF and brought the share income from this firm to tax in the hands of Sri Purwar in his individual capacity. The assessee went up in appeal. In respect of one year he succeeded. The AAC held that the share income properly belonged to the HUF and was taxabl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hands of Sri Purwar in his individual capacity. At the instance of the department, the Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the share income from the firm, M/s. Govind Ram Gajadhar Lal, has to be excluded from the income of Sri V. K. Purw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the partnership firm belonged to his HUF along with the share of profit. These pieces of evidence clearly showed that Sri Purwar had made an unequivocal declaration of his intention to abandon his separate interest in these moneys and to impress them with the character of joint family property. We are satisfied that the Tribunal was justified in inferring that the sum of Rs. 10,000, which was Sr....