INCOME TAX OFFICER v. R.M. PATEL
[Citation -1984-LL-0416-5]
Citation | 1984-LL-0416-5 |
---|---|
Appellant Name | INCOME TAX OFFICER |
Respondent Name | R.M. PATEL |
Court | ITAT |
Relevant Act | Income-tax |
Date of Order | 16/04/1984 |
Assessment Year | 1977-78, 1979-80 |
Judgment | View Judgment |
Keyword Tags | standard deduction • income from salary • capital account • interest earned • interest income |
Bot Summary: | The only contention made in these two appeals is that the AAC was not justified in allowing the claim of the assessee that the interest income credited in the accounts of the minor sons in the deposit accounts with the assessee firm was not includible under s. 64 of the IT Act. It is relevant to mention the facts obtaining in the case before us in brief as under: Here the minor sons have two accounts in the firm-one is the capital account and the other one is deposit account in which moneys advanced by the minors to the firm are credited along with the share of profits. The capitals contribution originally the minors have been credited in separate accounts. The minors thus have two accounts with the firms one is capital account and the other is deposit account. The dispute is with regard to the interest credited in the deposit account. As far as the interest credited in the accounts of the partners in the deposit account is concerned, there is practically unanimity amongst various High Courts that as far as this interest is concerned, it does not come within the purview of s. 64 and is not includible. Taking the totality of the facts into account and applying the principles laid down in the decided cases cited above, we are of the opinion that the interest credited in deposit account of the minors was not includible in the total income of the assessee and the AAC was justified in deleting the same. |