1992 (2) TMI 42

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 973-74 and 1975-76, the Tribunal has referred the following questions of law to this court : "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the declaration made on December 4, 1966, by the assessee impressing his one-sixth share in the firm of Messrs. Madan Lal Jagdish Chand with the character of the joint family property with effect from November 12, 1966, was valid in law ? 2. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t, by a deed of declaration dated December 4, 1966, the assessee's one-sixth share in the firm, Messrs. Madan Lal Jagdish Chand, had been impressed with the character of joint family property, with effect from November 12, 1966. The submission was that the income from the said firm did not belong to the assessee in his individual capacity, but belonged to the Hindu undivided family, of which he wa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... court in the case of CIT v. Kishan Lal [1980] 124 ITR 19, it was held in J. C Khanna's case that the share had been impressed with the character of joint family property and, therefore, the income would not be assessed in the individual's hands. The facts in the present case are identical to the facts of J. C Khanna's case. Both the present assessees and J. C. Khanna were the partners of the same .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X