Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS Respondent: Smt. RAVABAN B. MISTRY
Court Name: Supreme Court of India Judge(s): S. P. Bharucha, Mrs. Ruma Pal, I. Y. K. Sabharwal Title: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs Smt. RAVABAN B. MISTRY Case No.: C.A. No.3317 of 1990 Date of Judgment:2000-08-24 Reported As: 2001 PTD 2441 Result: Appeal dismissed
Judgment ORDER The High Court answered the following question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue, following its judgment in Dinubhai Ishvarlal Patel v. K.D. Dixit, ITO (.1979) 1181TR 122 (Guj). The question reads thus: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that the amount coming to the share of the husband of the assessee, in a representative capacity as the karta of the Hindu undivided family in the firm of Morvi Time Company was not liable to be included in the income of the assessee under the provisions of section 64 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?" The question is now covered against the Revenue by the decision of the Constitution Bench of this Court in CIT v. Shri Om Prakash (1999) 238 ITR 1044. The appeal is therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs. .