9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Whether property inherited by the assessee from his father under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, belonged to the joint family of the assessee and should not be included in the net wealth of the assessee-individual. Analysis: The case involved a reference under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, regarding the inclusion of property inherited by the assessee from his deceased father in his individual net wealth. The deceased, a Hindu governed by the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, left behind a widow, three sons including the assessee, and three daughters. The assessee claimed that a one-seventh share of the inherited property was joint family property and should not be assessed as his individual wealth. However, the Wealth-tax Officer disagreed and clubbed the share with the assessee's other wealth. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld the assessment, leading the assessee to appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, the assessee relied on the Gujarat High Court's decision in CIT v. Babubhai Mansukhbhai and another case, which supported his claim. However, conflicting views were presented by the Allahabad High Court and the Assam High Court, among others. The Tribunal sided with the Gujarat view, prompting a reference by the Revenue. The Supreme Court's decision in CWT v. Chander Sen was cited, emphasizing that the property inherited under the Hindu Succession Act does not automatically become joint family property. The Court highlighted that the Act's preamble aims to codify the law and prevent the application of old Hindu law in such cases. Consequently, the High Court ruled in favor of the Revenue, stating that the one-seventh share inherited by the assessee should be included in his individual net wealth, as it did not belong to the joint family. Both judges, K. C. Jagadeb Roy and S. C. Mohapatra, concurred with this decision, with no order as to costs being issued.
|
