Sathish Chandra, C.J.
1. The question of law referred for our opinion is whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the share of profit of the assessee from M/s. Gajadhar Prasad Narain Das could be included in his total income for rate purposes even though the same had been assessed in the hands of his father under Section 64(ii) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The question relates to the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69. The question itself gives an indication of necessary and material facts. It was hence not necessary to recite them in detail because the question of law is covered by a decision of this court in Arun Kumar Sarraf v. CIT : 104ITR90(All) . Inthat case, it was held that income could be included in the total income of the assessee for rate purposes only under Section 66. Under Section 66 only such income on which no income-tax is payable can be included in the total income of the assessee. Hence, the income of a minor assessee which has been assessed in the hands of his father and mother under Section 64 could not be included in the assessment of the minor for rate purposes. In view of this decision, the question referred to us is answered in the negative in favour of the assessee and against the department. The assessee will be entitled to costs which are assessed at Rs. 200.