Blending separate property into family hotchpot is not a taxable gift, but factual proof of blending remains essential.

A Hindu father's act of blending separate property into the family hotchpot, where valid under Hindu personal law, does not amount to a gift chargeable under section 2(xii) of the Gift-tax Act because the property is impressed with the character of joint family property rather than transferred as a taxable gift. Relief by writ of prohibition, however, depends on a clear factual foundation showing that such blending actually occurred and that the relevant family relationship and joint status were established. On the materials described, that factual basis was not clearly made out, so writ relief was refused and the matter was left to the revenue authorities.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a Hindu father who throws his separate property into the family hotchpot thereby makes a gift chargeable to gift-tax under section 2(xii) of the Gift-tax Act. (ii) Whether a writ of prohibition could be granted on the materials placed before the Court.

Issue (i): Whether a Hindu father who throws his separate property into the family hotchpot thereby makes a gift chargeable to gift-tax under section 2(xii) of the Gift-tax Act.

Analysis: The Court had already answered the same question in the connected references and held that when a Hindu father blends or throws his separate property into the hotchpot of the family and impresses it with the character of joint family property, there is no gift within the meaning of section 2(xii) of the Gift-tax Act. The governing inquiry is whether, under the personal law, there has in fact been a blending or conversion of separate property into joint family property.

Conclusion: In principle, such blending does not constitute a gift under the Gift-tax Act, and the answer is in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether a writ of prohibition could be granted on the materials placed before the Court.

Analysis: On the facts disclosed, the declaration did not clearly establish whether the petitioner remained joint with all relevant members of the family when the alleged throwing of property into the hotchpot took place. Without a clear factual foundation showing the personal-law position and the existence of blending, the Court was not able to determine the petitioner's claim finally and left him to establish his case before the appropriate authority.

Conclusion: The writ was not granted, and the petition was dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The legal position was clarified in favour of the assessee, but the petitioner failed to obtain writ relief on the existing materials and was left to pursue the matter before the revenue authorities.

Ratio Decidendi: A mere blending of separate property into the family hotchpot, where valid under Hindu personal law, does not amount to a taxable gift under the Gift-tax Act; however, the factual existence of such blending must be clearly established before relief can be granted.

---