9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Whether the businesses started by adult family members after the death of the patriarch were joint family businesses. 2. Whether the suit was barred by Section 67 of the Indian Income-tax Act. Analysis: Issue 1: The plaintiffs sought a declaration to prevent the sale of certain properties for income-tax arrears due from their elder brother. The court examined whether businesses initiated by adult family members post the patriarch's demise were joint family businesses. The income-tax authorities treated all businesses as joint family ventures, holding the family liable for taxes. The court upheld this view, emphasizing that the adult brothers lacked independent funds for the new businesses. Citing legal precedent, the court differentiated between trading and non-trading families, allowing a manager of a trading family to start ventures binding on minor members. The court noted that the new businesses, including wire-nail, lorry, tapioca, and yarn businesses, were not speculative and were considered joint family ventures. The court rejected the argument that the new businesses needed to be allied to the ancestral business, affirming the liability of the family for taxes on profits from these ventures. Issue 2: Regarding the applicability of Section 67 of the Income-tax Act, the court found the suit impermissible under this provision. Section 67 bars suits challenging income-tax assessments. Although the prayer sought a declaration regarding property liability, the essence was to contest the minors' share in joint family property. The court advised the appellants to utilize statutory provisions for such claims or involve tax authorities in related suits. Failing to follow these procedures rendered the suit unsustainable, irrespective of the phrasing of the prayer. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal, noting that the suit was barred by Section 67 of the Income-tax Act. In conclusion, the court upheld the joint family status of the businesses and dismissed the appeal due to the suit's incompatibility with Section 67 of the Income-tax Act. The judgment highlights the importance of adhering to legal procedures and statutory provisions when challenging income-tax assessments or property liabilities in joint family setups.
|
