The income tax returns might not be an effective guide to the real income of the parties who have been involved in the matrimonial dispute seen by the Apex court.
Family Court needed to decide the real income on a holistic assessment of the proof before it, the bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli mentioned.
For the case, the Family Court ordered Husband to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs 20,000 per month to his wife and Rs 15,000 each to their daughters. The same would rely on a finding that he would earn Rs 2 lacs as monthly income. During considering the amended petition furnished via the Husband the High court sees that under the ITR furnished via them he earns 4.5 lacs per annum. It mentioned that the Family Court had not signified the basis on which the same would analyze his income at Rs 2 Lakhs per month.
In appeal, the Supreme Court bench notices:
“On the first aspect, it is well-settled that income tax returns do not necessarily furnish an accurate guide of the real income. Particularly, when parties are engaged in a matrimonial conflict, there is a tendency to underestimate income. Hence, it is for the Family Court to determine on a holistic assessment of the evidence what would be the real income of the second respondent so as to enable the appellants to live in a condition commensurate with the status to which they were accustomed during the time when they were staying together. The two children are aged 17 and 15 years, respectively, and their needs have to be duly met”.
Recommended: Income Tax Liabilities on Marriage Gift & for Divorced Couples
The bench stated that the High Court was not explained in setting aside the order of the Family Court on the same basis. The revision petition has been restored by the court for the file of the High court for the newer consideration.
