1940 (8) TMI 37 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the maintenance allowance of Rs. 30,000 received by the applicant was received as a member of a Hindu undivided family under Section 14 of the Income-tax Act.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Membership in a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF):
- The applicant, Thakurain Rudh Kumari, claimed exemption under Section 14 (1) of the Income-tax Act, which states: "The tax shall not be payable by an assessee in respect of any sum which he receives as a member of a Hindu undivided family."
- The court analyzed whether the applicant was a member of an HUF. It was argued by the Income-tax Department that the property obtained by Kunwar Partab Bhan Prakash Singh through the will of Rani Pirthipal Kuar was his self-acquired property, and thus, the applicant had no vested interest in it.
- The court clarified the distinction between an undivided Hindu family and a Hindu coparcenary body, citing Mulla's Principles of Hindu Law and other legal precedents. It was established that a joint Hindu family includes all persons lineally descended from a common ancestor and their wives and unmarried daughters, irrespective of the existence of joint estate.
- The court concluded that the applicant, being the mother of the proprietor of the estate, should be deemed a member of an undivided family with Partab Bhan Prakash Singh.

2. Receipt of Maintenance Allowance as a Member of HUF:
- The next question was whether the applicant received the amount as a member of an undivided Hindu family.
- The court examined the will of Rani Pirthipal Kuar, which directed a guzara (maintenance allowance) to be paid to the applicant. Despite this, the court found that the applicant was entitled to maintenance under Hindu law as the mother of the estate's proprietor.
- The court referenced Mulla's statement that a son is under a personal obligation to maintain his aged mother, irrespective of whether he has inherited property from his father.
- The court determined that the applicant received the maintenance allowance not under the will but as a right under Hindu law, thus qualifying for exemption under Section 14 (1) of the Income-tax Act.

Conclusion:
- The court ruled in favor of the applicant, stating that the maintenance received by her was not assessable to income tax as it was received by her as a member of a Hindu undivided family.

Separate Judgment by Bennett J.:
- Bennett J. concurred with the judgment but emphasized that the amount received by the applicant in 1937-38 was maintenance in virtue of her position in the family, not under the will of Rani Pirthipal Kuar.
- He highlighted that the applicant received Rs. 2500 per month, less than what was stipulated in the will, indicating that the amount was fixed by the Court of Wards based on the estate's extent and the proprietor's status.
- He concluded that the applicant waived her rights under the will and agreed to receive maintenance, thus justifying the exemption from income tax.

Final Decision:
- The court answered the reference in the affirmative, in favor of Thakurain Rudh Kumari, affirming that the maintenance allowance received by her was exempt from income tax under Section 14 (1) of the Income-tax Act.