1990 (10) TMI 35

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... her, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the entire estate passed on the death of the deceased, he being the sole surviving coparcener of the Hindu undivided family at the time of his death ?" The relevant facts are the following. The deceased Dr. S. N. Bhargava, died on November 12, 1983. His wife, Smt. Rajni Bhargav .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... since Dr. Bhargava was the sole surviving coparcener, his interest was total and that the entire estate (Hindu undivided family properties) passed to his heirs. This was so held following the decision of this court in CED v. Kalawati Devi [1980] 125 ITR 762. It is thereupon that the accountable person applied for and obtained this reference. Mr. Rastogi, learned counsel for the petitioner, contend .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pinion, has no relevance whatsoever to the facts of the present case. This is not a case where the death of Dr. Bhargava took place at a time when the 1937 Act was in force. The simple question in this case is whether, on the date of death of Dr. Bhargava, his wife had Any share in the Hindu undivided family property. The answer can only be in the negative. The wife had no share nor could she su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X