Equal shares for deities in a gift without specification keeps interests certain and defeats the Section 41 proviso.

A gift or bequest to two deities without specified shares was treated under settled Hindu law as an equal gift to tenants in common, because deities are juristic persons capable of holding property. The court held that this rule applies to deities as well, so their interests were defined and known in law. Authorities under the Indian Succession Act did not alter that result, as they concern lapse of legacies and cannot create a joint tenancy or an interest unknown to Hindu law. On that basis, the proviso to Section 41 of the Indian Income-tax Act was inapplicable, and the assessee's position was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on a gift or bequest to two deities without specification of shares, the beneficiaries take in equal shares so that their shares are defined in law and the proviso to Section 41 of the Indian Income-tax Act is inapplicable.

Analysis: The income under the deed and the will was devoted to the worship and maintenance of two deities, but no express division of shares was made. The Court applied the settled Hindu law principle that a gift or bequest to two persons without specification of shares is taken as a gift in equal shares and as tenants in common, not as joint tenants. That rule was held to apply equally to deities, they being juristic persons capable of taking property. The authorities under the Indian Succession Act did not assist the revenue, because they deal with lapse of legacies and do not create a joint tenancy, and in any event cannot create an interest unknown to Hindu law. The shares of the deities were therefore certain and known.

Conclusion: The proviso to Section 41 of the Indian Income-tax Act did not apply, the Tribunal's view was correct, and the question was answered in the affirmative in favour of the assessee.

---