P SHANKARAIAH YADAV Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS batch of appeals raises questions of some general importance and interest. All of them arise out of a common order dated 30.06.2003 passed by the Hyderabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short the Tribunal), in I.T.A.Nos.1326 of 1997 and batch. Hence, they are disposed of through a common judgment.

(2.) THE appellant is an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act) in its capacity as Hindu Undivided Family (HUF). For the assessment year 1991 -92, returns were submitted claiming certain deductions. A document, dated 09.03.1990, named as Family Arrangement was enclosed. The said arrangement provided for allotment of a sum of Rs.1,25,000/ -, each, of the six minor daughters of Karta of HUF and that amount was in the form of Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs). In the context of the deduction of the interest that accrued on the FDRs, the Assessing Officer examined the document from the point of view of Section 171 of the Act. He came to the conclusion that the document does not amount to partial partition and though it is a family arrangement, it does not have the effect of taking away the corresponding wealth from the purview of HUF, and accordingly, treated the same, as the income of the HUF. Similar question arose for subsequent assessment years, and identical view was taken.

(3.) FEELING aggrieved by the orders of assessment, the appellant approached the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The appeals were allowed by the Commissioner, through order, dated 09.05.1997. The Revenue filed I.T.A.Nos.1326 to 1328 of 1997 and 113, 114 and 116 of 2001, before the Tribunal. The appeals were allowed through a common order and the order passed by the Commissioner was set aside. Hence, these appeals under Section 260A of the Act, by the assessee.