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 share income from the partnership business, which originated as a joint family business and was taken over after partition, was assessable in the hands of the Hindu undivided family or in the individual hands of the coparcener.
Analysis: The business had for years been assessed as joint family business, the partition deed itself recited that it was joint family business, and the finding that it continued to be joint family property until partition was a reasonable finding of fact. Where a business or property is acquired or held as joint family property, a partition does not necessarily convert the share taken by a coparcener into his separate property; it may continue to bear the character of joint family property in the hands of the coparcener and his sons. On the facts found, the appellant's share in the partnership formed after partition could not be treated as his individual asset.
Conclusion: The share income was rightly held assessable as income of the Hindu undivided family and not as the individual income of the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi: Property or business shown to have been joint family property before partition continues to retain that character in the hands of the coparcener after partition, unless a valid basis for treating it as separate property is established.