9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (4) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arch 31, 1971, and March 31, 1972, the joint family was credited with Rs. 17,650 and Rs. 19,769, respectively, as being the interest on the aforesaid credit balance. The ITO held that since the HUF, of which the assessee was the karta, did not possess any property prior to the declaration made by the assessee by which he had impressed the credit balance in the firm with joint family character, the declaration was ineffective, and, therefore, the entirety of the interest credited to the account of the HUF for both the assessment years should be considered as the income of the assessee in his individual capacity and was assessable in his hands. On appeal, the AAC, accepting the contention of the assessee, held that the declaration made by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee's wife and that, therefore, there is no question of applying the provisions of s. 64(2) at all. In that view, it held that the assessee's one-third of the interest credited to the account of the HUF in the books of the firm pertaining to the converted property can alone be assessed in the hands of the appellant for the two assessment years under consideration. At the instance of the revenue the following question has been referred : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Rs. 8,825 and Rs. 9,884 being 50% of the interest credited to the account of the Hindu undivided family of which the assessee is the karta in the books of the firm, M/s. M. S. Natesa Iyer and Co., for the accounting years ending Mar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the share of the member in the joint family property will be treated for the purpose of tax as the income of the member. Also, the share of income of the property proportionate to the share of the spouse and any minor son of the member in the family property will also be treated for the purpose of income-tax as the income of the member. The Explanation defined the interest of the spouse or any minor son of the individual in the property of the family as meaning the proportion in which the spouse or minor son would be entitled to share the property of the family if there had been a total partition in the family as on the last day of the previous year of the family relevant to the assessment year for which the individual is to be assessed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... females, it has for all intents and purposes fallen into disuse in the South since time immemorial Smruti Chandrika and Saraswati Vilas, however, are explicit and rule out the idea of a share in partition to the mother or the wife." The Supreme Court in Lakshmi Chand v. Ishroo Devi, AIR 1977 SC 1694 quoted with approval a passage in Mulla's Hindu Law, 14th Edn., page 403, wherein it was stated (p. 1699): " In Southern India the practice of allotting shares upon partition to females has long since become obsolete" and observed that: " In Madras though Mitakshara law is applicable it has been held that on a partition between the sons and the father, the mother is not entitled to any share." In Umaraparvathy v. Bhagavathy Amma [1972] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to agree with the contention of the learned counsel. The provisions in cl. (2) of s. 64 are to be applied in respect of only those matters mentioned therein, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, i. e., for the purpose of computation of the total income of the individual, notwithstanding any other law for the time being in force, a declaration impressing the individual property into a joint family property shall be deemed to be a transfer, and, further the income derived by the wife or the minor children of such individual shall be deemed to have arisen to the individual himself. The non obstante clause does not go beyond these purposes mentioned in the said sub-clause. It could not be intended, no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allotted, but that does not mean that under the Hindu law she will be entitled to claim the entirety of the property. " This decision relied on by the learned counsel is, therefore, not applicable to the facts of this case. The learned counsel for the revenue also wanted to contend that if once an allotment is made, the income derived from the property allotted might be includible in the assessee's hands and that, therefore, we must construe that for purposes of application of s. 64 she (the wife) is entitled to claim a share in the property. This is a farfetched construction. But, suffice it to say that the principle laid down in that case in no way suggests that the law has to be construed in any way differently from that of Hindu law as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
