9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (9) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ir, a Hindu governed by the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, on March 22, 1975 intestate, his widow, three sons including the assessee and three daughters survived him. The assessee along with the aforesaid class-I heirs succeeded to the separate properties of the late Maharaja. In respect of the years 1975-76 and 1976-77, assessments against the assessee were reopened as property succeeded to by the assessee from out of the separate property of the deceased had escaped assessment. The assessee claimed that he, along with his wife, constituted a joint family and one-seventh part of the separate property of the deceased, R. N. Singh Deo, is joint family property in his hands which cannot be assessed as his individual property. This was not accept ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed a decision in CWT v. Mukundgirji [1983] 144 ITR 18, where the Madras and Allahabad views have been followed. Mr. S. C. Roy, learned Advocate-General, who is also standing counsel for the Department submitted that in the decision in CWT v. Chander Sen [1986] 161 ITR 370 (SC) the principle has been settled. This is decision in appeal from the decision of the Allahabad High Court in CWT v. Chander Sen [1974] 96 ITR 634 which has been affirmed. It was clearly stated that the views of the Allahabad High Court, the Full Bench of the Madras High Court, the Madhya Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh High Courts are correct. The Supreme Court did not agree with the view of the Gujarat High Court. Analysing the principle, the Supreme Court observed (at p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w, mother, daughter of a predeceased son, etc. " Since the view of the Appellate Tribunal was on the basis of the decision of the Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Babubhai Mansukhbhai (Dr.) [1977] 108 ITR 417, which has been overruled by the Supreme Court, we answer the question by stating that, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the one-seventh share in the separate property of the deceased inherited by the assessee from his deceased father under section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act does not belong to the joint family of the assessee and, therefore, is to be included in the net wealth of the assessee as his individual wealth. The question is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. There shall be no order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
