PARASMAL KANAJI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is at the instance of the assessee, to answer the following question of law, namely :

(2.) THE relevant assessment year is 1976-77. THE assessee, Parasmal Kanaji, is a selling agent of M/s. Shri Radha Krishna Oil Mill, Sukhraj Mehta is the son of the assessee, Parasmal Kanaji. During the relevant period, four transactions of purchase and sale of oil were made in which the assessee, Parasmal Kanaji, was involved and they were shown to be made in the name of his son, Sukhraj Mehta. THE profit that accrued from these transactions amounted to Rs. 16,633. THE assessee claimed that these transactions in the name of his son, Sukhraj Mehta, were real so that the profit earned thereon was not earned by the assessee, Parasmal Kanaji. THE Income-tax Officer rejected the assessee's contention and held that these transactions were really of the assessee himself and his son, Sukhraj Mehta, was a mere benamidar. Accordingly, this amount of profit was included in the income of the assessee. THE Appellate Assistant Commissioner and thereafter the Tribunal have affirmed thus conclusion. Hence, this reference at the instance of the assessee.

(3.) NO costs.