SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1982 Supreme(Del) 13

LEELA SETH, S.RANGANATHAN
SANGHI MOTORS – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – Respondent


S. RANGANATHAN, J.

( 1 ) THESE are four income tax references at the instance of the assessee, a firm known as M/s. Sanghi Motors, pertaining to the assessment years 1966-67 to 1969-70. The common question involved in all these references lies within a very narrow campass. The assessee is a firm of eight partnres of whom three were partners of the firm in their capacity as the Kartas of their respective Hindu Undivided Family. To one of such persons, namely, Suresh Kumar Sanghi the firm paid salary, interest on deposits and bonus. It is common ground that Suresh Kumar Sanghi was a partner in the firm in his capacity as the Karta of his Hindu Undivided Family and that the income of the firm which fell to hisshare was assessed in the hands of the respective family and not included in his assessment as an individual. Equally it is common ground that the salary and the bonus were paid to Suresh Kumar Sanghi in respect of services rendered by him and were assessable as his individual income. So also the deposits made by him with the firm on which he derived interest were all deposits made by him out of his own individual funds and the interest in respect of those deposits also has been.







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top