- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Roshan Lal v. Commissioner Of Income-Tax.
Factual and Procedural Background
This opinion addresses a reference question posed to the court regarding the correct legal treatment of a sum of Rs. 21,302 received by a Hindu undivided family (HUF) from Amritsar Brick Kiln Co. The issue concerns whether this amount, comprising share of profit and interest, should be included in the individual income tax assessment of the assessee under section 64(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court also notes that a similar question was considered in a related Income-tax Reference No. 25 of 1980 (Amrit Lal v. CIT), decided on the same day.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the Tribunal was correct in law to hold that the amount of Rs. 21,302 received by the Hindu undivided family from Amritsar Brick Kiln Co., as share of profit and interest, is liable to be included in the individual assessment of the assessee under section 64(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Arguments of the Parties
The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.
Table of Precedents Cited
| Precedent | Rule or Principle Cited For | Application by the Court |
|---|---|---|
| Amrit Lal v. CIT, [1989] 179 ITR 105 (P&H) | Interpretation of section 64(2) of the Income-tax Act regarding inclusion of HUF income in individual assessment | The court relied on the reasoning and decision in this precedent to answer the current reference question in favour of the Revenue. |
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The court referred to the reasoning recorded in the similar case of Amrit Lal v. CIT decided on the same day. By applying the legal principles established therein, the court affirmed that the amount of Rs. 21,302 received by the Hindu undivided family from Amritsar Brick Kiln Co. as share of profit and interest is properly includible in the individual assessment of the assessee under section 64(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court did not elaborate further in this opinion but adopted the rationale from the earlier decision.
Holding and Implications
The court's decision in this reference is in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. There will be no order as to costs. The direct consequence is that the specified amount is liable to be included in the individual income tax assessment under the relevant statutory provision. No new precedent was set beyond affirming the established position as recorded in the related case.
S.S Sodhi, J.:— The question of law referred for the opinion of this court is as under:
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amount of Rs. 21,302 out of share of profit and interest received by the Hindu undivided family of the assessee from Amritsar Brick Kiln Co. was liable to be included in the individual assessment of the assessee under section 64(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?”
2. A similar question came up for consideration before this court in Income-tax Reference No. 25 of 1980 (Amrit Lal v. CIT, [1989] 179 ITR 105 (P&H)) decided today, that is, December 2, 1988.
3. For the reasons recorded therein, this reference too is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. There will be no order as to costs.
Alert