9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (4) TMI 57X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the joint Hindu family ? 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the finding of the Revision Board that income from the holdings recorded in the name of the wife and son of Maharaj Kumar was the income of the assessee's family is legally sustainable ? " The assessee is a Hindu undivided family of which Dr. Vijaya Anand, Vizianagaram, was the karta. In assessment proceedings for the year 1361 F. under the U.P. Agricultural Income-tax Act, the Sub-Divisional Officer as the assessing authority found that the villages, Bari Mahewa and Ghori, were recorded as the tenancy land of the son and wife, respectively, of the karta and treating these villages as the tenancy of the Hindu undivided family he included the income therefro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Board to refer the case to this court for its decision on the questions of law arising therefrom. The Revision Board made a reference, and this court found that the statement of the case and the questions referred were inadequately framed and, accordingly, called for a better statement of the case and clear and definite questions of law. The Revision Board has now made this reference on the two questions set out above. On both the questions we are clearly of opinion that the answer should be in the negative and in favour of the assessee. The case of the assessee was that the land in village Bari Mahewa was leased out to Kunwar Vishwa Nath Vankateshwar Alakh Narain Singh, the minor son of Dr. Vijaya Anand, under a lease deed dated April 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on, the Revision Board proceeded on the view that "the entire income from the joint family property plus the land covered by these two leases" should be treated as one unit because the land was managed jointly. An attempt has been made to explain the finding of the Revision Board. It is urged that in the absence of the original lease deeds, the assessing authority and the Revision Board drew the obvious conclusion that the management of all the properties, that is, of the karta, his wife and son, was joint and as the income from the said holdings accrued to the Hindu undivided family the case was covered by the provisions of section 10 of the Act. It seems to us that the findings of the Revision Board are vitiated by a complete lack of app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income of a Hindu undivided family. Then, it is urged on behalf of the State that a presumption arises in Hindu law that property standing in the name of a member of the Hindu undivided family must be presumed to have been acquired from Hindu undivided family funds, and, therefore, to be Hindu undivided family property, where the member of the family does not possess sufficient funds of his own for the purpose of acquiring the property. It does not appear that the Revision Board applied its mind to this aspect of the matter and we do not find anything in the order of the Revision Board which shows that the wife and son of Dr. Vijaya Anand did not have sufficient funds for the purpose of acquiring these properties. In any event, there is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
