9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (8) TMI 143X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, issued a notice under section 148 of the Act, in response thereto the assessee asked for the reasons for reopening the assessments. Ultimately, the ITO added back the amounts of Rs. 44,905 and Rs. 36,151 which was the share income of two minor sons of the assessee from the firm Nizam Sons. Both these additions have been upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) on appeals filed by the assessee. The assessee has, consequently, come up in second appeal before the Tribunal. 2. We have heard the representatives of the parties at length in these appeals. The main point argued before us on behalf of the assessee was that besides the assessee, his wife Smt. Chunni was also a partner in the same firm and the share income of these children had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d come to the notice of the ITO that minor sons of the assessee were admitted to the benefit of partnership and during the relevant accounting years the income arising to the minors from the admission to the benefit of this partnership was to be clubbed with the income of the parent whose income was higher even if the parent was not a partner in that firm in view of the Explanation to section 64(1)(iii). Thereafter, the ITO has in respect of both the years given the respective figures of income of the assessee and his wife which were Rs. 43,140, Rs. 37,975, Rs. 27,114 and Rs. 12,344, respectively. Although the ITO has admitted that the income of the minors was included in the income of Smt. Chunni, he specifically mentioned that by reason o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubbing is to be done with the parent whose income is higher and the assessee well knew that his income was higher than his wife. 3. It was argued on behalf of the assessee that it will be a case of double addition. This income has already been clubbed in the hands of the wife and the ITO would not be able to exclude it from the wife's assessment inasmuch more than four years had elapsed after the assessment of the wife. Personally we are of the opinion that for this unfortunate situation the assessee has to thank himself. It is he who created the entire confusion. However, we hope that the Commissioner would exercise his extraordinary jurisdiction under section 264 of the Act, and since we are adding the income of these minors in the hand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
