9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (7) TMI 89X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dentified by the ld. counsel for the assessee regarding inclusion of share income form Lekh Raj Suriender Kumar, Kaithal, which, according to the assessee, belongs to Shri Narinder Kumar Miglani, individual. In order to appreciate the dispute, if facts are briefly stated, the same will be of immense help. 2. The assessment year involved is 1979-80 for which the relevant previous year ended on 30th Sep 1978. M/s Lekh Raj Surinder Kumar of Kaithal had been a partnership concern since past and as per partnership deed dt. 25th April 1974, there were following three partners in the said firm: 1. Sh. Lekh Raj 50% 2. Sh. Narinder Kumar 10% 3. Sh. Surinder Kumar 40% Shri Narinder Kumar in the said firm till 1st April, 1978 was a partner i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lier. The ITO also highlighted that there was no reference to that effect in the partnership deed dt. 1st April, 1978. For reasons given by him in the assessment order, he included the share income from Lekh Raj Surinder Kumar as determined vide his order dt. 17th October, 1979 amounting to Rs. 15,618 in the hands of the assessee HUF. 3. When the assessee came before the AAC he also after narrating the facts and for reasons given by him, confirmed the action of the ITO. It is this action of the AAC which is disputed by the assessee. 4. The ld. counsel for the assessee took us at length through the two partnership deeds dt. 25th April 1974 and 1st April, 1978 placed on assessee's compilation on pages 2 of second paperbook and 4 and 5 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... necessary that there must be capital there can be credit of HUF in a firm and still one could enter the partnership in the individual capacity. Undoubtedly, it is not given in so may words in partnership deed dt. 1st April 1978 that Shri Narinder Comer Miglani has entered into partnership in individual capacity but it is not required either to be so given as per law. On the other hand, it is always individual who can enter into partnership. The mention regarding experience of Sh. Narinder Kumar is undoubtedly there which if at all supports the contention of the assessee as it is only the individual who can have experience and not he HUF. If a Karta has been holding share on behalf of HUF and later on wants to hold the same in his individual ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
