https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37868 On partition of a Hindu undivided family, partnership capital invested by the family was divided equally, and the parties thereafter held those investments as tenants-in-common. In the absence of division by metes and bounds, the future profits attributable to the sons' shares could not be treated as exclusively belonging to the assessee; he was accountable only for the respective divided interests. Clause 5 of the partition deed was construed in context as governing future conduct and matters already accounted for, not as extinguishing the sons' enforceable rights in the profits arising from their capital. Those profits and accretions were therefore excluded from the assessee's net wealth. en-us Wed, 15 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:21:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37868 On partition of a Hindu undivided family, partnership capital invested by the family was divided equally, and the parties thereafter held those investments as tenants-in-common. In the absence of division by metes and bounds, the future profits attributable to the sons' shares could not be treated as exclusively belonging to the assessee; he was accountable only for the respective divided interests. Clause 5 of the partition deed was construed in context as governing future conduct and matters already accounted for, not as extinguishing the sons' enforceable rights in the profits arising from their capital. Those profits and accretions were therefore excluded from the assessee's net wealth. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Wed, 15 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37868