Commissioner of Income Tax, Bihar-1, Patna vs Shri Bishwanath Prasad, C/o Patna Electric Works, Patna and Others

G.C. Bharuka, J.—These four tax cases relating to five partners of a firm involve the following common question of law under the same set of facts : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in law to hold that the salary received by the working partners for services rendering to the firm M/s. Patna Electric works, Patna could not be assessed in the Hands of the H.U.F. of the working partners for the assessment year 1976-77.

The question, as framed, has taken care of wrapping within itself the foundational facts necessary for giving answer to the question. Therefore, those facts need not be repeated. On identical facts, a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dwarka Prasad, Rameshwar Prasad Mehrotra, T.N. Mehrotra, Shivanath Prasad and Bishwanath Prasad, has held that the salaries received by the partners are assessable as their individual income. While taking that view reliance was placed on a Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Atma Ram Budhia, wherein it has been held that the salaries received by a member of a H.U.F. From the firm in which he was a working partner can be assessed in his hand as individual and cannot be included in the income of H.U.F of which he is a co-parcener (sic). The same view has again been taken to the case of C.I.T. Vs. Chandradeep (1984) 156 I.T.R 659. 2. Respectfully following the view taken fey this Court earlier, as referred to above we answer the question in affirmative, i.e. in favour of the assessee but without any order as to costs.

Aftab Alam, J.

I agree.