9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Whether the proportionate maintenance allowance to widows formed part of the assessee's total income. 2. Whether the status of the assessee should be individual or as an HUF. Analysis: The judgment pertains to a reference under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, where the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred questions of law to the High Court for opinion. The first issue revolved around the proportionate maintenance allowance paid to widows of the deceased, which the Tribunal held was not part of the assessee's total income due to a legal obligation or overriding title. The court relied on a previous decision and affirmed that the maintenance allowance did not form part of the total income, ruling in favor of the assessee on this issue. Regarding the second issue, the Tribunal determined that the estate inherited by the assessee was an impartible estate under the rule of primogeniture. Section 27(ii) of the Act deems the holder of an impartible estate as the individual owner of all properties within it. The court established that income from an impartible estate belongs solely to the holder, making the assessee liable to be taxed as an individual, not as a representative of an HUF. Consequently, the court upheld the Tribunal's decision to consider the assessee's status as an individual, contrary to the status of an HUF as determined by the ITO. In conclusion, the High Court answered both questions in favor of the assessee. The maintenance allowance to widows was not included in the total income, and the assessee's status was deemed individual due to the impartible nature of the estate inherited. The parties were directed to bear their own costs for the reference.
|
