B.P.Jeevan Reddy, C.J. - (1.) A common question is referred in all these three cases. Though the assessees are different, the relevant facts are identical. All the three assessees happened to be partners in a partnership firm, M/s. Chhittermal Ramdayal, Agra, and that is how their cases are identical so far as the question referred is concerned. The question referred under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act at the instance of the Revenue is : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in its opinion that the addition made by the Wealth-tax Officer for the sustained cash credit as part of the assessee's wealth treating them as asset is incorrect ?"
(2.) For the sake of convenience, we may refer to the facts in W. T. R. No. 69 of 1979.
(3.) The assessee is a Hindu undivided family. Sri Harish Chandra Agrawal is its karta. As karta of this Hindu undivided family, he was a partner with 1/5th share in the aforesaid firm, M/s. Chittermal Ramdayal, Agra.;