COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. ALWARSAMY P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these tax cases at the instance of both the assessee and the Revenue, the following common questions are referred to this Court for decision :

(2.) AS far as the first question is concerned, it is not in dispute that it is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Harbhajan Lal (1994) 116 CTR (SC) 136 : (1993) 204 ITR 361 (SC), against the Department. Therefore, following the said decision, the first question referred to us is answered in the negative and against the Department.

(3.) IT is also to be noted that it is immaterial whether the partner has income below the taxable limit or has no income at all. In the decision in Puspa Devi vs. CIT (1993) 112 CTR (All) 285 : (1993) 203 ITR 42 (All), following the view taken by the various High Courts, the Allahabad High Court has held that the income arising to the minor sons of the assessee as a result of their admission to the benefits of a partnership is liable to be included in the total income of the assessee under s. 64(1)(iii) of the Act, notwithstanding that the assessee has no income of her own from any source whatsoever. In the instant case, the assessment year is 1979-80. Following the above decision, the second question referred to us is answered in the affirmative and against the assessee.