Commissioner of Income Tax vs Umedbhai S. Patel

D.A. Mehta, J.—The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench ''B'' has referred the following question u/s 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1962 (the Act) at the instance of Revenue.

Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was right in coming to the conclusion that share income from the firm to the two smaller HUFs cannot be clubbed in the hands of the bigger HUFs?

Heard learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties.

The Assessment Years in question are 1986-87, 1987-88 and 1988-89. While passing the impugned order(s), the Tribunal has followed its own order in assessee''s own case for Assessment Years 1980-81 and 1981-82. This Reference has been adjourned time and again for the Applicant-Revenue to ascertain the position as to what has happened in relation to the said order of the Tribunal pertaining to Assessment Years 1980-81 and 1981-82. The learned Counsel for the Applicant-Revenue is not in a position to inform the Court in this regard and states, under instructions, that the Number of SLP (Civil) mentioned in paragraph No. 2 of the statement of case also does not relate to matters pertaining to the present assessee.

In the circumstances, without entering into merits of the controversy, the question is left unanswered leaving it open to the Tribunal, to modify its decision in accordance with law, in the event the earlier order of Tribunal in assessee''s own case for Assessment Years 1980-81 and 1981-82 has undergone any modification by virtue of any subsequent pronouncements either by this High Court or by the Apex Court.

The Reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.