: Satish Chandra, C.J. - The Tribunal has referred for the opinion of this Court the following questions :
'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of the partition deed, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that a partial partition within the meaning of clause (b) of the Explanation to section 171 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 had taken place amongst the members of the assessee Hindu Undivided Family on 30-61964 ?'
The Tribunal had answered this question in favour of the assessee principally on the basis of its decision in the case of Hoshiari Lal Kalvani & Ors., Jalpaiguri came up for hearing before this Court and the view of the Tribunal was upheld on 15-1-1981 in ITR No. 249 of 1974, CIT v. Hoshiari Lal Kalvani & Ors., Jalpaiguri . There precisely the same question was decided. It was held that partial partition within the meaning of cl. (b) of the Explanation to s. 171 of the IT Act, 1961 had taken place amongst the members of the family.
2. Learned counsel for both sides had agreed that the decision in Hoshiari Lal Kalvanis case fully covers the present case. Accordingly, we answer the question referred to this Court in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee and against the department.
There will be no order as to costs.
Suhas Chandra Sen, J. - I agree.