9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (3) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tire assets of the Hindu undivided family by the karta in favour of his five sons was void ? " The assessee is a Hindu undivided family. The case relates to the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59 for which the relevant dates are Diwali of 1956 and 1957, respectively. Shri Balchandra Malaiya, karta of the Hindu undivided family, made gifts of movable and immovable properties amongst his five sons, two of them were majors and other three were minors. He also made gifts of certain amounts to his daughters, one of whom had just attained majority and the other was minor. These gifts were evidenced by a gift deed dated December 5, 1955, and December 27, 1955. The stand of the assessee was that the recipients of the gifts had become the owners ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cestral property. A Hindu father or any other managing member has power to make a gift of ancestral immovable property within reasonable limits for " pious purposes ". Now what is generally understood by " pious purposes " is gift for charitable and/or religious purposes. The meaning of " pious purposes " has been extended also to cases where a Hindu father makes a gift within reasonable limits of immovable ancestral property to his daughter in fulfilment of an ante-nuptial promise made on the occasion of the settlement of the terms of her marriage, and the same can also be done by the mother in case the father is dead. Yet later, in Thamma Venkata Subbamma v. Thamma Rattamma, AIR 1987 SC 1775, it was observed that : " There is a long cat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... int Hindu family from being disintegrated. Learned counsel appearing for the assessee has referred to the decision of this court in CIT v. V. C. Gupta [1994] 208 ITR 476 to contend that even in such a situation, the gift is merely voidable and not void. The said case was a case relating to the self-acquired property of the donor and not the property of a Hindu undivided family. Under the circumstances, the facts are clearly distinguishable. Likewise reference has been made by learned counsel to the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Jayantilal Prem Chand Shah [1995] 211 ITR 111, in which their Lordships held that once it was established that the minors were not benamidars of their Hindu undivided family, they represented themselves an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he alternative stand taken by the assessee was that the said gifts could be treated as allotted to the respective members of the Hindu undivided family by partial partition. We find that even if treating the same to be relinquishment or renunciation such renunciation would enure for the benefit of all other coparceners and not for the benefit of individuals to whom the gift was made. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was justified in holding that the gift of almost the entire assets of the Hindu undivided family by the karta in favour of his five sons was void in the facts and the circumstances of the case. Accordingly, the question referred is answered against the applicant (assessee) and in favour of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
