9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (3) TMI 90X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n a partition was made by the asses see between himself, his wife and minor unmarried daughter, by a deed dated March 4, 1978 (annexure-D). This partition was recognised by the Income-tax Officer under section 171 of the Income-tax Act and assessment was made in the status of a Hindu undivided family, though the return was filed as individual. The Commissioner of Income-tax issued a notice under s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the partition amongst the assessee, his wife and his unmarried daughter was not valid and thus the order of the Income-tax Officer made under section 171 recognising the partition is not valid ?" The question is, when there is a single coparcener with other female members in his family, whether, und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er is self evident. A sole coparcener cannot divide the property with himself or grant any share in the property. In the absence of more than one coparcener, partition is impossible. The grant of any share in the property by the sole surviving male member of the Hindu undivided family to any other family member could be only in the nature of a settlement of the property upon them in lieu of their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
