| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1967 SLG 155 1967 SLD 155 (1967) 63 ITR 25 |
Mysore High Court
IT REFERRED CASE No. 16 OF 1964, MAY 31, 1966
A.R. SOMNATH IYER AND AHMED ALI KHAN, JJ
S.R. Rajasekhara Murthy for the Appellant. S.P. Bhat for the
Respondent
IT REFERRED CASE No. 16 OF 1964, MAY 31, 1966
A.R. SOMNATH IYER AND AHMED ALI KHAN, JJ
S.R. Rajasekhara Murthy for the Appellant. S.P. Bhat for the
Respondent
Commissioner of INCOME TAX
v.
Srimati Rama Bai
Law:
Section:
Section 4 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 3 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Individual - Assessable as - Assessment years 1961-62 and 1962-63 - Deceased, a member of HUF, made a will in favour of his wife, bequeathing all his properties to his wife - He authorised his wife to collect income from bequeathed properties to discharge debts, educate children and maintain his family - Whether, having regard to terms of will, assessment should have been made on deceased's wife as an individual in respect of income from properties comprised under will of deceased - Held, yes FACTS The deceased made a will on 15-12-1958. It was contended before the Income-tax Officer that the properties of deceased were bequeathed under the will to the family consisting of his wife 'R' and his seven children, and that the assessment should be made on that basis. But the Income-tax Officer overruled that contention and made the assessment on the interpretation that the bequest under the will was to the wife and not to the family. In this view taken by the Income-tax Officer, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner concurred, but in the further appeal presented to the Appellate Tribunal, the assessee succeeded in the contention that the bequest was to the family and not to the wife On reference : HELD In the preamble to the will, the testator stated that he made the will in favour of his wife. He next stated that he had bequeathed all his movable and immovable properties out of his own free will and volition to his very dear wife, 'R'. He next proceeded to state that 'R' should take possession of all his movable and immovable properties on the strength of his will and collect all the amounts due to him and discharge the debts payable by him. The will contained a further direction that the business carried on by the testator should continue to be conducted by his wife and that she should educate the children, maintain the family, and apply the property of the estate in her own unfettered discretion for the well-being and prosperity of the members of the family. Thus, it was clear that the bequest under the will was in favour of the wife. That bequest was made inβ¦
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