Undivided Hindu Family status: female-only families persist and maintenance payments remain exempt under Section 14(1), therefore.

An undivided Hindu family may continue to exist after the death of the last male coparcener where female members retain jointness in residence, worship and mutual obligations; the absence of a male does not automatically dissolve the undivided family. Amounts paid to a widow under an agreement that merely acknowledged and fixed a pre-existing maintenance liability retain their character as payments referable to her status as a member of the undivided Hindu family and remain exempt under Section 14(1) of the Income-tax Act. The reference is answered against Revenue and for the assessee.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an undivided Hindu family continues to exist after the death of the last male member so that the remaining females constitute an undivided Hindu family; (ii) Whether amounts received by a widow pursuant to an agreement fixing her maintenance cease to be amounts received by her as a member of an undivided Hindu family for the purposes of Section 14(1) of the Income-tax Act.

Issue (i): Whether an undivided Hindu family continues to exist after the death of the last surviving male member, leaving only female members entitled to maintenance.

Analysis: The Court reviewed authorities and principles distinguishing coparcenary interest from the broader concept of an undivided Hindu family, noting that jointness may exist without joint property and that females can remain joint in mess, residence and worship. The disappearance of coparcenary on the death of the last male does not automatically dissolve an undivided family where females continue undivided relationships and obligations.

Conclusion: The Court answers this issue in the negative; an undivided Hindu family can continue to exist consisting only of females and does not cease to exist merely because there is no male member.

Issue (ii): Whether amounts received by the widow under the agreement of May 5, 1932, are no longer amounts received by her as a member of an undivided Hindu family and thus not exempt under Section 14(1).

Analysis: The Court found that the widow had been receiving a maintenance allowance prior to the agreement and that the agreement merely acknowledged and fixed the existing liability at an enhanced rate. The source and nature of the payments remained maintenance referable to her status as a widow and member of an undivided Hindu family; subsequent incidents such as impartibility of the estate did not alter the character of the liability.

Conclusion: The Court answers this issue in the negative; the amounts received under the agreement are payments received by her in her capacity as a member of an undivided Hindu family and are exempt under Section 14(1).

Final Conclusion: The reference is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee, upholding the exemption of the maintenance amounts under Section 14(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922.

Ratio Decidendi: The existence of an undivided Hindu family is not dependent on the presence of a male coparcener; female members may constitute an undivided family, and an agreement fixing maintenance does not change the character of payments that arise from membership of an undivided Hindu family.

---