Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the throwing into the hotch-pot of the assessee's self-acquired property and the subsequent partition among the members of the Hindu undivided family constituted an indirect transfer of property to the wife and minor son within the meaning of section 16(3)(a)(iii) and section 16(3)(a)(iv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.
Analysis: Property voluntarily thrown by a coparcener into the common hotch-pot becomes joint family property under Hindu law, and the separate and subsequent partition transactions are genuine and independent. A transfer to a Hindu undivided family is a transfer to an assessable unit, but income arising to that family cannot, on that footing alone, be treated as income arising to the wife or minor child of the transferor within section 16(3)(a). The provision dealing with income of a person, including a Hindu undivided family, from transferred assets is separately dealt with in section 16(3)(b), and the facts did not disclose any direct or indirect transfer by the assessee to his wife or minor son.
Conclusion: The transaction did not amount to an indirect transfer to the wife or minor son within section 16(3)(a)(iii) or section 16(3)(a)(iv); the answer was in the negative and the assessee succeeded.