https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26763 A house standing in the son's name was treated as the deceased's individual property rather than HUF property because the deceased had separate income, another house had already been treated as HUF property, and the disputed house was consistently shown in income-tax returns as his personal asset. Those returns were strong evidence of his own classification of the property. The record also failed to show any sufficient HUF nucleus or surplus, supported by accounts or other material, for acquisition or construction of the house. The property was therefore includible in the estate, and the claim of HUF ownership was not proved. en-us Thu, 20 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Feb 2010 13:09:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26763 A house standing in the son's name was treated as the deceased's individual property rather than HUF property because the deceased had separate income, another house had already been treated as HUF property, and the disputed house was consistently shown in income-tax returns as his personal asset. Those returns were strong evidence of his own classification of the property. The record also failed to show any sufficient HUF nucleus or surplus, supported by accounts or other material, for acquisition or construction of the house. The property was therefore includible in the estate, and the claim of HUF ownership was not proved. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 20 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26763