9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (5) TMI 78X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see. The share income included consisted of the share of profit and the interest on the credit balance of the account of the minor in the books of the said firm. The dispute is with reference to inclusion of interest income. This was deleted by the AAC. The revenue is aggrieved before the Appellate Tribunal. The facts as emerged during the course of hearing of the appeal are that the minor had a deposit account with the above firm even before he was admitted to the benefit of partnership. He was admitted to the benefit partnership for the first time for the asst. yr. 1976- 77 and 1977-78 income from interest of the above deposits was not included in the income of the assessee, though the share of profit was included. For the asst. yr. 1978- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the minor because of his admission to the benefit of partnership. That being the position, we have no hesitation in sustaining the order of the AAC with regard to exclusion of the interest earned by the minor on his deposit in the firm in which he is admitted to the benefit of partnership. 5. Ground Nos. 2 3 are inter connected. These are therefore, disposed of together. These grounds read as under: (i) The ld. AAC of IT has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 8,925 made by the ITO as income from other sources, and (ii) in not holding that difference of ITR 4,375 between the value of emerald stone of Rs. 4,550 transferred at the cost of Rs. 8,925 to M/s. Rishab Green Gems is revenue profit and is taxable as such in the hands o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt with M/s Rishab Green Gems. The ld. Counsel for the assessee therefore contended that there was no cash deposit of Rs. 8925 with M/s Rishab Green Gems. On the contrary, stones of the value of Rs. 4550 which were disclosed under the voluntary disclosure scheme were transferred at the market value of Rs. 8925. It was therefore urged that the action of ITO in treating this amount as assessee s income from undisclosed sources was uncalled for. Alternately it was stated that the difference of Rs. 4375 between the value of emerald stone of Rs. 4550 and the value of which it was transferred at Rs. 8925 could at best be taxed as income from capital gains. The above submission found favour with the AAC. He, accordingly deleted the amount of Rs. 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
