TMI Blog1988 (12) TMI 48X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ta of a Hindu undivided family (HUF), was a partner of Nagesh Engineering Works. On April 1, 1971, a deed of partnership of the Hindu undivided family was executed whereby the members of the Hindu undivided family were to share the profits received from the aforesaid firm and overriding title was created in favour of the wife and children against Varinder Kumar. For the assessment year 1974-75, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in relying upon the partial partition agreement dated April 1, 1971, which, according to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, is invalid and holding that by virtue of the agreement dated April 1, 1971, an overriding title in favour of the wife and minor sons of the assessee in respect of the share income from Nagesh Engg. Work ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar [1989] 177 ITR 515 (P H), decided on November 28, 1988). Learned counsel for the Revenue urged that the aforesaid decision will not apply to the facts of the present case because there is no order of the Income-tax Officer granting partial partition of the Hindu undivided family whereas, in the aforesaid decided case, partial partition had been granted by the Income-tax Officer. It is true th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessed in the hands of the Hindu undivided family. Under the circumstances, it has to be deemed that the Income-tax Officer accepted the partial partition and once that is so, the argument raised before us on behalf of the Revenue has to be rejected. For the reasons recorded above, we answer both the questions in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue with costs q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
