SHRIMATHI MAHESH Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Giving rise as they do to a single common question, these five appeals by the assessees were heard together and are disposed of by a common order.

(2.) The material facts of the case are that at the relevant point of time the assessees before us were the members of an AOP called "Makshri Shrimathi Enterprises" (hereinafter referred to as the "small AOP"). In its turn, the small AOP was a member of another AOP called "Maxima Andal Enterprises" (hereinafter referred to as the "main AOP").

(3.) In the case of the assessees before us, their share of the income of the small AOP was chargeable to tax in their hands subject of course to the provisions of s. 86(v) of the Act. In the assessment as made initially the provisions of s. 86(v) were applied and necessary rebate granted.