Skip to content


Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. V. Kumaraswamy. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberT.C. No. 927 of 1979
Reported in(1985)47CTR(Mad)336
AppellantCommissioner of Income Tax
RespondentV. Kumaraswamy.
Excerpt:
- .....assessee submits that this court in t.c. no. 1231 of 1977 has disagreed with the view taken by the andhra pradesh high court in cit v. sanka sankariah and a special leave petition filed by the revenue as against the said judgment of the andhra pradesh high court has since been dismissed by the supreme court. therefore the decision of the andhra pradesh high court should be taken to have become final and conclusive and in so far as this court judgment in t.c. no. 1231 of 1977 is in conflict with the decision of the andhra pradesh high court, it should be taken to requirement reconsideration. we are not in a position to agree with the said contention of the ld. counsel for the assessee for the rejection of the special leave petition by the supreme court cannot be taken to be expression of.....
Judgment:

: Ramanujam, J. - At the instance of the revenue, the following question has been referred to this court for its opinion by the ITAT :

'Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the share income of the minors could not be clubbed under s. 64(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the hands of the assessee herein for the asst. yr. 1975-76 ?'

2. A similar question came up for consideration before this court in T.C. No. 1231 of 1977 and this Court by judgment dt. 4-8-1983 has held that the share income of the minors could be clubbed under s. 64(1)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961 in the hands of the assessee even if he represents the joint family in the firm and not in his individual capacity. The said decision has also been followed in the decision in T.C. Nos. 458 to 461 of 1978 and 530 of 1978 dt. 28-9-1983 by another Division Bench Having regard to the said decision, the question in this case has to be answered in the negative and against the assessee.

3. Mr. K. Srinivasan, ld. counsel for the assessee submits that this court in T.C. No. 1231 of 1977 has disagreed with the view taken by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Sanka Sankariah and a special leave petition filed by the revenue as against the said judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court has since been dismissed by the Supreme Court. Therefore the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court should be taken to have become final and conclusive and in so far as this court judgment in T.C. No. 1231 of 1977 is in conflict with the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, it should be taken to requirement reconsideration. We are not in a position to agree with the said contention of the ld. counsel for the assessee for the rejection of the special leave petition by the Supreme Court cannot be taken to be expression of its opinion on the question involved. The fact that the Supreme Court has refused to entertain a special leave petition against the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court cannot be taken to be disapproval of the judgment of this Court referred to above. In this view, of the matter, we are bound to follow the decision in T.C. Nos. 1231 of 1977 and the decision in T.C. Nos. 458 to 461 and 530 of 1978. There will be no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //