1985 (10) TMI 30

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ose of three Income-tax Cases Nos. 9, 10 and 11 of 1978 as they involve a common question of law, though relating to three different assessment years. The assessee, an individual, entered into a partnership along with his wife, Shrimati Madhuri Gupta, on July 1, 1965, with certain other persons to form the firm, M/s. Roop Textile Industries, Rohtak. For the assessment year 1967-68, the assessee d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... his wife from the said firm. However, in Part IV of the return, he entered the income received on account of the share of his wife and contended that since the assessee was a partner in the said firm as manager and the karta of the Hindu undivided family and not in his individual capacity, the provisions of section 64 of the Income-tax Act (for short, called "the Act"), were not applicable. Assess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Tribunal but failed. The application filed under section 256(1) of the Act having been also dismissed, the Revenue filed the present petition under section 256(2) for a mandamus to get the following question referred : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that there was no mistake apparent from the records which required rectifica .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X