1998 (2) TMI 85

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... assessment year 1976-77 is: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the interest earned by the minor with her own funds lying with the firm in which she was admitted to the benefits of the partnership could not be regarded as income attributable to the benefit of the partnership includible under section 64(1)(iii) of the A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ny capital, though the minor had been admitted to the benefits of that partnership. That, however, is not of any relevance for the present purposes. The interest income on which the assessment has been made is the interest received on the capital standing to the credit of the minor, which capital was required to be contributed by the minor in consideration of the minor being admitted to the benefi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... minor's admission to the benefits of the partnership. Learned counsel for the assessee, however, contended that the amounts contributed by the minor as the share of the capital of the firm were monies which had been received by way of gifts from persons other than the assessee and, therefore, any interest received on that amount cannot be included in the assessable income of the father. The sour .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the admission to the benefits of the partnership firm, as in the absence of any such admission to the benefits of the firm, there would be no question of making a contribution to the capital for receiving any interest on such capital contribution. We are entirely in agreement with what has been laid down in that decision. The Supreme Court in the case of S. Srinivasan v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 273, c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ) v. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 158. That was a case where the minor had made certain deposits though not obliged to do, so, and the interest paid on such deposits was held to be benefit which could not be regarded as a direct result of the minor's admission to the benefits of the partnership. In this case, the admission of the minor was in consideration of the capital contributed by the minor, and that d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X