Equal shares of deities under a dedication deed prevent assessment at the maximum rate where beneficiaries are identifiable.

Where a dedication deed did not specify separate fractional shares for the deities, the Court noted that the legal effect of the dedication was equal sharing by the deities. Because the beneficiaries were identifiable and their shares were certain in law, the provisions dealing with indeterminate or unknown shares did not apply. The Tribunal therefore applied the settled principle that, in the absence of specified shares, the deities take equally and assessments are to be made separately in their hands. On that basis, assessment at the maximum rate under the relevant provisions was held inapplicable, and the issue was answered in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the shares of the deities in the dedicated property were indeterminate or unknown so as to attract the first proviso to section 41(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 and section 164 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The dedication deed did not specify separate fractional shares for the deities, but the legal effect of the dedication, as earlier recognized by the Court, was that the deities took equal shares. Where the shares are certain in law and the beneficiaries are identifiable, the provisions applicable to indeterminate or unknown shares do not apply. The Tribunal applied the settled principle that, in the absence of specified shares, the deities take equally and the assessments are to be made separately in their hands.

Conclusion: The shares of the deities were not indeterminate or unknown, and the provisions for assessment at the maximum rate were inapplicable. The question was answered in the affirmative in favour of the assessee.

---