High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Cit v. Jitendra Kr. - INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 72 of 1999  RD-AH 12671 (24 July 2007)
Court No. 2
Wealth Tax Reference No. 72 of 1999
Commisisoner of Income Tax, Agra
Shri Jitendra Kumar, HUF, Farrukhabad
Hon'ble R.K.Agrawal, J.
Hon'ble Vikram Nath, J.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following question of law under section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for opinion of this Court.
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law, in holding that the capital invested in M/s Ratan Cold Storage with appreciated value of assets in the said firm was not assessable in the hands of the assessee in the status of HUF?"
The reference relates to the assessment years 1988-89 to 1990-91.
Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:
The assessee is a Hindu Undivided Family. The assessee claimed before the Wealth-tax Officer that the income earned from M/s. Ratan Cold Storage, by virtue of having been admitted to the benefits of partnership during the period of his minority and the accumulated interest thereon was the individual property of the assessee, though the funds invested in the said firm were received by him at the time of partial partition of Hindu Undivided Family. The Wealth-tax Officer did not accept the contention of the assessee and included the wealth in the hands of the assessee Hindu Undivided Family as per details mentioned below:
Assessment year 1988-89 Rs. 8,54,700/-
Assessment year 1989-90 Rs. 8,51,802/-
Assessment year 1990-91 Rs. 10,60,894/-
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Agra vide his consolidated order dated 5.10.1993 allowed the assessee's appeals for all the aforesaid three years and held that wealth aggregating to the aforementioned amounts shall be treated as belonging to Shri Jitendra Kumar individual and, therefore, he directed to exclude the same from the wealth of the appellant Hindu Undivided Family. The Department preferred second appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal following its earlier order decided the issue in favour of the assessee and dismissed the Revenue's appeals for all the three years under consideration.
We have heard Sri A.N.Mahajan, learned standing counsel for the Revenue. No body has appeared for the respondent assessee.
We find that this Court in the case of I.T.R.No. 209 of 1988 decided on 06.01.2005 which is inter partes has answered the similar question of law in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
Respectfully following the aforesaid decision we answer the question of law referred to us in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
There will be no order as to costs.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.