Law:

Section:

Section 3 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 - Charge of tax - Deceased 'R' died leaving behind his widow, son 'G' and G's wife - At that time 'G' had no issue - Whether properties left by deceased were to be assessed in hands of HUF consisting of 'G', his widowed mother and his wife - Held, yes FACTS One 'R' had acquired some properties at a partition between him and his brothers. 'R' died in 1934, leaving behind his widow and his son 'G'. ie assessee The assessee claimed before the revenue authorities that the property was owned by the HUF consisting of 'G', his widowed mother and his wife. 'G' had no issue. The Tribunal took the view that the property left by 'R' was owned by 'G' in his status as an individual and was subject to wealth-tax in his hands. On reference : HELD This Court in the case of Pratap Narain v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 505 held that where there only existed a coparcener and his wife, they constituted a HUF and the assessment was required to be made in that status. In the instant case, the position, if anything, was better as there was not only a coparcener and his wife but also a widowed mother. Thus, the assets assessed in the hands of 'G' belonged to the HUF. Note : The case hasbeen decided in favour of the assessee. CASE REFERRED TO Pratap Narain v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 505 (All.). JUDGMENT Manchanda, J.-This is a case stated under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The question referred is: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assets assessed in the hands of Gajanand belonged in law to the Hindu undivided family constituted by Gajanand and his mother and should have been assessed as such?" The relevant facts are these: One Rameshwar Das had acquired some properties at a…

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