9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (8) TMI 57X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t NO. C.520, Defence Colony,New Delhiwas allotted to Smt. Amrit Kaur as a widow of her first husband Brig. Agya Singh on7th Sept., 1953. She took possession of the plot of February, 1957 and started construction in February, 1959 which was completed on October, 1960. She stated that she had spent Rs. 43,000 out of the funds of her first husband and Rs. 30,000 taken as a loan from second husband on the construction of the said property. She was also the guardian of her minor son Shri Dilsher Singh from her first husband. In the return of income for the asst. yr. 1961-62 she stated that the income from the property C-520, Defence colony blonged to her son Dilsher Singh and this contention was accepted by the ITO in the following words in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perty was not transferred by Smt. Amrit Kaur by a registered sale deed to her son Sri Dilsher Singh, she continued to be the owner thereof and the income was consequently assessable in her hands. He also observed that a perusal of the Bank pass book of Smt. Amrit Kaur showed that the rent from this property was being regularly received and credited in her account. The income from this property was also included in the assessee s income for the asst. yrs. 1967-68 to 1971-72. 3. The assessee preferred appeals to the AAC. The appeals were disposed of by the AAC by a consolidated order dt.31st Dec., 1973. The AAC took the view that on her second marriage Smt. Amrit Kaur forfeited the interest in property No. C-520 Defence Colony which the was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Dilsher Singh, as she had remarried and the plot was allotted to her as a widow of her first husband. The Regional Settlement Officer allotted the plot to Shri Dilsher Singh. Keeping in view all these facts, the ACC directed the ITO to excluded the income from this property from the total income of the assessee as it was assessable in the hands of Shri Disher Singh for all the assessment years under appeal. The revenue being aggrieved is in appeal before us. 4. On behalf of the Revenue Shri H.S. Gulati submitted that Smt. Amrit Kaur did not inherit the property as the plot in question was allotted to her after the death of first husband Brig. Agya Singh. The Departmental Representative was that Smt. Amrit Kaur constructed a house on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the construction of the house was financed out of those funds. The assessee s learned counsel pointed out that Smt. Amrit Kaur remarried Brig. N.S. Bhagat on11th March, 1956before the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 came into force and therefore she had only limited estate in the property of her late husband. It was submitted that on her remarriage with Brig. N.S. Bhagat on 11th March, 1956 she forfeited all her rights in the property inherited by her from her first husband and the same vested in there son Shri Dilsher Singh from her first husband whose guardian she was during his minority. Reliance was placed on Page 107 of Mulla Hindu Law, 13th Edition and it was contended that no transfer by any registered deed was necessary. It was also s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er deceased husband s property by way of maintenance, or by inheritance to her husband or to his lineal successors, or by virtue of any will or testamentary disposition conferring upon her, without express permission to remarry, only a limited interest in such property, with no power of alienating the same, shall upon her remarriage cease and determine as if she had then died, and the next heirs of her deceased husband or other persons entitled to the property on her death, shall thereupon succeed to the same." The above section only modifies the Hindu Law on the point that a remarried widow ceases to have any interest in her former husband s property and that the next heir of that husband succeeds to the same. Smt. Amrit Kaur took steps ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disposal funds of Rs. 94,567 inherited by her from her late husband Brig. Agya Singh. The total cost of construction was Rs. 73,000. It could, therefore, easily be financed out of the deceased husband s funds inherited by her. The property constructed with the deceased husband s funds will bear the same character as the property inherited by a widow. Therefore, by virtue of the provision of s. 2 of the Hindu Widow s Remarriage Act, 1956, the super structure also vested in Shri Dilshare Singh on the remarriage of Smt. Amrit Kaur by operation of law. In a recent full Bench decision in the case of Bhondu vs. Ram Dayal AIR 60 Madhya Pradesh 51, it has been held that a widow on her remarriage is divested of her husband s property and it vests in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
