9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (3) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he movable and immovable properties that, as a result of the said partitions, fall to the share of the assessee constituted not his separate property but the joint property of the said Hindu undivided family ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the income earned from the aforesaid properties during the year under consideration was taxable in the hands of the Hindu undivided family comprised of the assessee and his daughter ?" which have been referred to us by the Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act. A few relevant facts leading to this reference deserve to be noted at the outset. The concerned assessment year is 1972-73. The respondent assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, following the principles laid down by the Supreme Court and various High Courts in the decisions referred to before him, held that the assessee was entitled to claim the status of Hindu undivided family in respect of the properties received by him on partial partition and that the Income-tax Officer was not justified in including the income received by the appellant on partial partition in the individual income of the appellant-assessee. The Revenue went up in appeal to the Tribunal against the said decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Tribunal noted, in the light of the four partition deeds, that the properties were divided among the assessee, his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee was assessable in the hands of the assessee's undivided family consisting of himself and his daughter and, accordingly, the Department's appeal was dismissed. As noted earlier, at the instance of the Revenue, the three questions earlier extracted have been referred by the Tribunal for our opinion. At the time of hearing of this reference, various decisions of the Supreme Court and other High Courts including this court were cited before us. From these decisions, a legal position has clearly emerged to the effect that even while a person who was earlier a member of the Hindu undivided family receives property on partition of a Hindu undivided family, he continues to be a member but of a smaller-Hindu undivided family if it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the son. The properties were, therefore, liable to be assessed in the hands of the son as properties of a Hindu undivided family and income received from them was also liable to be taxed in the hands of the son as income of the Hindu undivided family. If the Hindu undivided family can consist of a brother and his unmarried sisters as per the aforesaid decision, it necessarily follows that father and his unmarried daughter can also form Hindu undivided family and income of such family can be brought to tax as income of a Hindu undivided family. In our view, the aforesaid decision of this court squarely answers the questions posed for our consideration against the Revenue. However, as other decisions including decisions of the Supreme C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be held that the assessee in the present case did constitute a joint Hindu family along with his unmarried daughter at the relevant time and it cannot be said that the joint family had ceased to exist as far as these two members were concerned. Mr. Raval, for the Department, however, placed great store on a later decision of the Supreme Court in the case of C. Krishna Prasad v. CIT [1974] 97 ITR 493. So far as the aforesaid decision is concerned, the Supreme Court was concerned with a situation in which the assessee along with his brother and father had formed a Hindu undivided family up to October 30, 1958, when there was a partition between them. In the partition, the assessee got some house properties and vacant sites. On the date of p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at decision can be pressed into service in the facts of this case. In this case, the assessee along with his unmarried daughter constituted a Hindu undivided family at the relevant time. There was plurality of persons and, consequently, the ratio of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court in C. Krishna Prasad's case [1974] 97 ITR 493 cannot at all be applied to the facts of the present case. The Tribunal, therefore, rightly distinguished the said decision and held that it was not applicable to the facts of the present case. A similar view has been taken by other High Courts. We may only mention the latest decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Seth Tulsidas Bolumal v. CIT [1988] 170 ITR 1. It is not necessary to dilate upon the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
