<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1957 (9) TMI 56 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182826</link>
    <description>A karta may make a valid gift of ancestral movable property to his wife within reasonable limits, even without express consent of another adult coparcener, where the transaction is not repudiated and the surrounding facts show a real intention to divest title. Under Punjab law, an unauthorised alienation by a coparcener is voidable rather than void, and assent may be inferred from knowledge without objection. The reasonableness of the gift depends on the size of the estate, its income, the number of family members, and the surrounding circumstances. On the facts, the gift was upheld, the family was divested of title to the shares, and the dividend income was not taxable in the hands of the Hindu undivided family.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2022 18:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=428978" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (9) TMI 56 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182826</link>
      <description>A karta may make a valid gift of ancestral movable property to his wife within reasonable limits, even without express consent of another adult coparcener, where the transaction is not repudiated and the surrounding facts show a real intention to divest title. Under Punjab law, an unauthorised alienation by a coparcener is voidable rather than void, and assent may be inferred from knowledge without objection. The reasonableness of the gift depends on the size of the estate, its income, the number of family members, and the surrounding circumstances. On the facts, the gift was upheld, the family was divested of title to the shares, and the dividend income was not taxable in the hands of the Hindu undivided family.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182826</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>