Partial partition under Hindu law requires proof of severance and identified division, not merely equal payments to family members.

Under Hindu law, a partial partition requires evidence of an intention to sever and a factual division of the relevant property or share; mere equal payments to two minor sons did not establish such a partition. The accountable persons had originally treated the payments as gifts, and no material showed that the family remained joint only in respect of the balance of the estate or that any definite portion had been partitioned off. In the absence of supporting evidence of intention and ascertainment of a severed share, the amounts could not be excluded from the dutiable estate and remained includible.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amounts paid to the two sons on the three relevant dates were shown, on the evidence, to have been made as a result of a partial division of the family assets so as to exclude them from the dutiable estate.

Analysis: A partial partition under Hindu law may relate either to persons or to property, but it must be supported by evidence showing the intention to sever and the factual ascertainment and partitioning of the relevant share or property. Mere equality of the amounts paid to the two minor sons on the different dates did not by itself establish a partial partition. The original stand of the accountable persons was that the payments were gifts, and no material was placed to show that the family continued joint in respect of the remaining property or that any definite portion of the estate had been partitioned off. The surrounding circumstances, including the absence of evidence as to the intention of the family members, did not support the inference of partial partition.

Conclusion: The question was answered against the accountable persons and in favour of the revenue; the amounts remained includible in the dutiable estate.

---