Managing agency commission is treated as separate income of the coparcener unless acquired using joint family property.

Where a managing agency agreement is executed in the names of individual coparceners and the firm is the contracting party, the managing agency commission is prima facie the separate income of the coparcener. The governing principle requires evidence that managing rights were acquired by utilising joint family property or that the family estate suffered detriment; absent such evidence, prior assessments do not convert subsequent receipts into joint family income. The doctrine of blending applies only where pre existing family property was blended before income arose; outcome: commission treated as individual income of the coparcener.

---

---

Issues: Whether the managing agency commission earned by a coparcener (Murugappa Chettiar) is assessable as income of the Hindu undivided family or is the individual income of the karta.

Analysis: The managing agency agreement was executed in the names of the two brothers as partners and contains no indication that it was entered into on behalf of the joint family; the firm, not the undivided family, is the contracting party and a Hindu undivided family is not a legal "person" capable of entering into such a contract. Absent evidence that the managing agency rights were acquired by utilising joint family property or that the family estate suffered detriment as part of acquiring the managing agency (for example, by sale or transfer of family assets to the company), the commission arising from the managing agency is prima facie the separate income of the coparcener. Prior assessments treating similar receipts as joint family income, without showing a continuing legal basis, do not convert future income into joint family property; the doctrine of blending requires the property to have existed and been blended prior to the income arising. Authority distinguishing cases where family property was used or suffered detriment (treated as joint family income) from cases where no such connection exists was applied.

Conclusion: The managing agency commission is the individual income of Murugappa Chettiar and not income of the Hindu undivided family.

---