AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ramachandran Nair, J.—Heard learned Senior counsel Dr. K.B. Mohamedkutty appearing for the appellant and learned Senior Standing Counsel Shri.P.K.R.Menon appearing for the respondent.
Search was made in the residential premises of the assessee''s father, which led to block assessment in the name of the father as well as in the name of the assessee. However, since for part of the block period of 10 years the assessee was a minor, income was assessed at the hands of the assessee only for periods after she became a major. The Tribunal directed assessment by clubbing of income of the minor during the period of minority in the hands of the father as provided u/s 64(1A) of the Income Tax Act. Even though consequential order was issued against the assessee''s father and he filed appeal before this Court against the block assessment confirmed by the Tribunal, we have vide judgment in ITA Nos.183 & 223 of 2010 dated 17/11/2011, dismissed the appeals.
The question raised in this case is only against the direction of the Tribunal to assess the income of the assessee during the period of minority along with the income of the father in his name. In fact this order does not have much significance because in block assessment rate of tax is 60%, which is higher than the maximum marginal rate applicable after clubbing of income of the minor with the father''s income. Other issues raised are only on factual findings with regard to valuation of investments in land made by the assessee''s father in her name. We, therefore do not find any merit in the appeal and the same is consequently dismissed.