9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (7) TMI 164X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the members has taxable income. 2. The assessee-family consists of the karta Shri Krishna Rao, his wife and the minor daughter. The karta has two other children who are also minors, but there had been a partial partition between the karta and the two minor children. One of the minor children who is now separated is a partner in a firm in which the karta's wife is also a partner. In the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raph II of Part I of the First Schedule will be applicable. In support of this contention, he referred to the speech of the Finance Minister while introducing the Finance Bill, 1981. He also submitted that as per the Supreme Court decision in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597 a reference could be made to the speech in order to understand the purpose for which the provision was enacted. He al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f partnership amounted to Rs. 1,03,315. By the addition of this amount under section 64, the income has exceeded Rs. 12,000. Since the income of the wife of the karta without the inclusion of the income of the minor son is below Rs. 12,000, it is submitted that the provisions of sub-paragraph II of Part I of the First Schedule will not be applicable. 6. So the real issue is what is meant by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in the case of CIT v. G. Gopal Rao 1985 Tax LR 273. They have quoted the Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT v. Smt. P.K. Kochammu Amma [1980] 125 ITR 624 where it is stated by their Lordships: "... The total income of the assessee chargeable to tax would include the amounts representing the shares of the spouse and minor child in the profits of the partnership...." Again, the Andh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
