Case Details

Citation(s)
1966 SLG 193 1966 SLD 193 (1966) 59 ITR 216
Calcutta High Court
IT REFERENCE NO. 26 OF 1962, MARCH 26, 1965
G.K. MITTER AND S.A. MASUD, JJ
B.L. Pal and B. Gupta for the Applicant

Commissioner of IncomE tax

v.

Smt. Bani Rani Rudra

Law: Income Tax Act, 1922

Section: 9

Law: Income Tax Act, 1922

Section: 9

Section 26 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 9 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Income from house property - Co-owners - Assessment years 1954-55 and 1955-56 - Assessee-HUF came into existence on death of one 'J' who died intestate, leaving certain immovable properties and a widow as also a minor son who subsequently succeeded to property in equal shares - Whether since shares of co-owners of property were definite and ascertained, income from immovable properties left by deceased could only be assessed in their hands under section 9(1) read with section 9(3) of 1922 Act and and same could not be treated as income belonging to joint family even if there was no partition between widow and her son - Held, yes FACTS The assessee-HUF governed by Dayabhaga School of Hindu law, came into existence on the death of one J who died intestate, leaving certain immovable properties and a widow, as also a minor son. On the death of J, his son and wife succeeded to the property in equal shares. For the assessment years 1954-55 and 1955-56, while assessing the income from the house properties, the ITO and the AAC held that section 9(3) of 1922 Act was attracted only in the case of AOP, the members of which had definite and ascertainable shares but did not apply to a HUF. However, the Tribunal found that when a Hindu governed by Dayabhaga School of Hindu law died intestate leaving any property, his widow was entitled to an equal share with the son under the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937, though the widow's interest in the property was a limited interest, irrespective of the question as to whether she had a claim for partition or not, her undisputed right to share the property equally with her son could not be questioned and, therefore, held that on the death of J, his son and wife became entitled to the properties in equal shares and under section 9(3) of the 1922 Act the assessment on the income from properties could be assessed only in the hands of two persons separately inasmuch as they were co-owners of the properties each having a definite share therein. On reference : HELD Under section 9(1) of the 1922 Act "a tax shall be payable by…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492