9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (9) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r 1966-67, the assessee submitted returns under the I.T. Act showing his status as an individual and the authorities had assessed him only as an individual on the basis of the returns submitted by him. However, for the assessment year 1970-71, the assessee filed a: return showing his status as the karta of the HUF. That was not accepted by the ITO and the assessments for that year and for the earlier years 1967-68 and 1968-69 were made on the assessee treating him as an individual. Aggrieved by the said assessments, the assessee took the matter in appeal to the AAC, who held that the status claimed by the assessee as the karta of an HUF has to be accepted in view of the terms of the will executed by the assessee's adoptive father bequeathin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the HUF and not as an individual, is reasonable or not has to be determined with reference to the terms of the will executed by the adoptive father of the assessee and all the surrounding circumstances. The learned counsel for the Revenue does not dispute the fact that the Tribunal in this case, has determined the status of the assessee after a consideration of the terms of the will as also the surrounding circumstances. He would, however, say that the Tribunal has not properly interpreted the terms of the will and, therefore, it has come to a wrong conclusion that the status of the assessee is an HUF and not an individual. Therefore, the question arises as to whether the Tribunal has properly interpreted the terms of the will in this cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perties jointly with that son. In the will, the testator, while giving certain properties to his wife, specifically says that she will have those properties absolutely with full powers of alienation, but when he bequeathes the properties to the assessee, he does not say that he will take the properties absolutely, but says that he will hold the properties and share the same with another son who may be born to the testator before his death. It is no doubt true that no son was in fact born to the testator before his death and, therefore, the said clause directing the assessee to share the properties, along with the son to be born, jointly did not come into operation. The question whether a son was born or not is immaterial as the intention of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tral property which forms the nucleus. However, it is unnecessary for us to go into the question as to whether all the properties covered by the will are the self-acquired properties of the testator. Even assuming that all of them were self-acquired properties, still it is open to the testator to give the same in favour of the assessee absolutely as representative of the HUF. In this case, the testator while giving the property to his wife has stated that she will take the properties absolutely with full power of alienation, but when he gives the properties to the assessee, the testator says that the assessee will take the property and hold the same for himself and for the benefit of the son to be born. From this, the intention of the testa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
