Sri Govind Mahato And Sri Baikunth Nath ... vs Asstt/Dy. Cit on 10 August, 2006
We have to accept the contention of the assessee that the amount in question has been deposited with the Bank in the name of the assessee as a custodian. It is not the assesses amount and it is a settled principle that if the amount of the client is kept in the custody of the advocate in his professional capacity, the amount cannot be said to be the money or income of the assessee and to this proposition of law, reference can be made to the decision of CIT v. Tarun Bhai D Desai 198 (wrong citation correct is 84) ITR page 713 and Mani Lal Ambalal & Co. v. A.G. Lula and Ors. 176 ITR, Page-253.