TMI Blog2001 (6) TMI 176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of Income-tax (Appeals), thus, has wrongly directed the Assessing Officer to allow deduction of Rs.35,000 under section 80-I of the Income-tax Act, 1961 @ Rs.7,000 in respect of each child separately. 2. That the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) being erroneous in law and on facts be set aside and the order of the Income tax Officer be restored." 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee shown income from plying of truck, capital gains, and interest/dividend. The assessee had also included income of five minor children from interest/dividend under section 64(1A) of the Income-tax Act. While computing the income the assessee claimed deduction under section 80-I at Rs.35,000 @ Rs.7,000 per minor children. The Assessi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T v. Lalji Agarwal [1998] 234 ITR 820 (All.). It was further stated that the jurisdictional High Court has allowed the appeal of assessee on similar facts. It was further stated that in the case of jurisdictional High Court the income of wife was added in the hands of the husband and no deduction was allowed under section 16 to the wife. The Hon'ble High Court has directed that separate deduction is allowable to assessee on the income added on behalf of the wife. Therefore, it was stated that the facts are similar, as here in this case the minor's income was added in the hands of the father. Accordingly separate deduction is allowable under section 80-I and the CIT(Appeals) has rightly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. I have heard t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on is allowable on the total income of the individual. Under section 80-I, only one deduction is allowable which the Assessing Officer has already allowed to the assessee. Therefore, in my considered view, no further deduction can be allowed to the assessee. 7. I have considered the case laws relied upon by the assessee. The jurisdictional High Court in the case of Lalji Agarwal, has held that if the salary income of the wife is added to the income of the husband, then net salary income of the wife after allowing standard deduction, is to be clubbed with that of her husband and not the gross salary income. This case pertains to assessment year 1976-77. Therefore, in my considered view and with due respect, it is not applicable on the fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
