9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (8) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty and the income cannot be included in his individual assessment. The ITO did not accept this submission. He held that the intention of the assessee's father that the property should be treated as joint family property is not clear from the will dated 7-8-1969 executed by him. Thus, the house property which the assessee got under the will dated 7-8-1969 is individual property. Accordingly he incl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their families. Hence, the AAC was wrong in holding that the property belongs to the HUF. The learned counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order of the AAC. He urged that the language of the will clearly indicates that the property was given to the sons and their families under the will dated 7-8-1969. He laid stress on the words 'Puthra Pouthra Paramparya', and submitted that it clearl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppan Chettiar v. CIT [1975] 99 ITR 1 the Supreme Court considered the use of the words 'heirs, executors, administrators and assignees' used in the gift deeds. On the basis of the above words in the above case it was contended for the assessee that the gift was to the sons as heads of the respective families. The Supreme Court did not accept this submission. It was held as under: "Mr. Desai furt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents to suggest that the interest transferred to the sons was limited in any way...." The above ratio squarely applies to the instant case. There is nothing to indicate in the will dated 7-8-1969 that the property was given to the families of the three sons. There is nothing to restrict the enjoyment of the property with full rights by the three sons in their individual capacity. Thus, the prope ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
