Case Details

Citation(s)
1967 SLG 440 1967 SLD 440 (1967) 65 ITR 123
Mysore High Court
TAX REFERRED CASE No. 2 OF 1966, JANUARY 18, 1967
A. NARAYANA PAI AND K.R. GOPIVALLABHA IYENGAR, JJ.
T. Krishna Rao for the Petitioner. R.S. Mahendra and S.R. Rajasekhara Murthy for the
Respondent

P.F. Pinto

VS

Commissioner of Wealth Tax

Law:

Section:

Section 3 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 - Charge of tax - Assessment year 1957-58 - Assessee was an Indian Christian professing Roman Catholic faith - Assessee's ancestors were original Hindus and later converted to christianity - He inherited certain properties from his grandfather - In his wealth tax return assessee claimed status of HUF - Revenue disallowed claim of assessee on ground that he was a Christian and could not become a HUF - Whether expression "Hindu undivided family" is limited to Mitakshara hindu families - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, assessee was not entitled to claim that he should be assessed in status of Hindu undivided family - Held, yes FACTS The assessee was an Indian Christian professing the Roman Catholic faith. His ancestors were originally Hindus and later converted to Christianity. The ancestors of the assessee were at one time residents of South Kanara. It appeared that the assessee's grandfather's grandfather migrated to Coorg and settled down there. On the information available, the first or almost the first, person to acquire property in Coorg appears to have been the assessee's paternal grandfather 's'. He acquired certain property and developed it as a coffee estate. He left behind him three daughters and two sons 'M' and 'X'. 'X' died unmarried and without leaving any issue. The assessee, was the son of 'M'. During the lifetime of 'M', some time after the death of 'S', one of the daughters of 'S' appears to have laid claim to a share in the property left by 'S'. That claim was resisted by 'M' on the plea that this family was governed, not by the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, but by the Hindu law which their ancestors were following before their conversion to Christianity. The dispute, however, did not result in any decision by court but was settled by means of a compromise by which some property was made over to the sister. Later, a daughter of one of the daughters of 'S' filed Suit against the assessee claiming a share in the property left by 'S'. Some other members of the family were also parties to the suit. The claim by the plaintiff was once again on the strength of the provisions of the Indian Succession…
🔒
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