Cit Vs. Subhash Chand

counsels: a.n. mahajan, for the revenue shakeel ahmad, for the assessee head note: income tax deduction under section 80v--expenditure incurred in relation to tax proceedingsinterest on borrowed capitalheld: tribunal was justified in allowing deduction under section 80v in respect of interest paid by the assessee to the firm on the amount borrowed from firm by assessee-partner. income tax act, 1961 s.80v clubbing of income--under section 64(1)(iii)income of minorheld: the tribunal was correct in law in holding that the interest derived by the minors on the investments made with the firm was not as a result of their admission to the benefits of the partnership and that it could be included in the assessee|s income under section 64(1)(iii). income tax act, 1961 s.64(1)(iii) in the allahabad high court r.k. agrawal & k.n. ojha, jj. - indian penal code, 1860 [c.a. no. 45/1860]. section 302; [m.c. jain, r.c. deepak & k.k. misra, jj] murder plea as to accused being minor school register and transfer certificate not proved before court according to law held, it has to be ignored and question of age is to be determined on other evidence and circumstances surfacing on record. age determined on the basis of x-ray plates and report prepared by c.m.o., is the correct age of accused. accused was declared to be child on the date of commission of offence of murder. however, considering fact that now accused was around 41 years, he cannot be sent to approved school. accused was directed to pay fine of rs.25,000/- under section 302 i.p.c., amount of fine was directed to be paid as compensation to wife of deceased. mohammad1. the income-tax appellate tribunal, allahabad, has referred the following two questions of law under section 256(1) of the income tax act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') for opinion to this court :'1. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the income tax appellate tribunal was correct in law in holding that the interest derived by the minors on the investments made with the firm was not as a result of their admission to the benefits of the partnership and that it could noi be included in the assessee's income under section 64(1)(iii) of the income tax act, 1961 ?2. whether the tribunal was correct in law in allowing deduction under section 80v of the income tax act, 1961, on the amount of interest paid by the assessee to the firm, in which he is a partner ?'2. we have heard sri a.n. mahajan, learned standing counsel for the revenue and sri shakeel ahmad for the respondent-assessee.3. the reference relates to the assessment years 1980-81 to 1984-85. so far as the first question is concerned sri a.n. mahajan, learned standing counsel submitted that this court in cit v. subhash chand (it reference no. 217 of 19834. so far as the second question is concerned, during the assessment years 1981-82 to 1984-85 the respondent had paid interest to the firm from which he had borrowed money to pay tax. under section 80v of the act, which as it stood during the relevant assessment years deduction of any interest paid by any assessee on any money borrowed for paying any tax due from him was allowable. in the present case payment of tax related to the amount clubbed under section 64 of the act related to the income of the minors assessed during the relevant assessment year. the liability of payment of tax was on the respondent, therefore, if the respondent had borrowed the amount to pay tax, the interest paid by him is an allowable deduction.5. in view of the foregoing discussion we answer the first question in negative i.e., in favour of the revenue.....