1982 (6) TMI 113

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....een filed before the ITO on19th July 1979claiming partial partition of the firm. In that partial partition, the capital of the assessee HUF, namely, Rs. 30,000.25 p. Was said to have been divided in four equal shares between Kashi Ram, his son and grand son. The ITO after holding enquiry refused to recognise the said partition on the ground that the wife of Babulal was not given any share in the partial partition. The partition is held to be against the principles of Hindu Law. The ITO held that such a partition cannot be recognised. He relied upon the commentary in Mulla's Hindu Law at 403 where the ld. Author speaking about the rights of a wife in a Mitakshara family belonging to the northern part of the country summarised the legal posit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....given share the partition effected does not become void at any rate. The ITO is not entitled to refuse recognition to such a partition. The AAC found no force in it. He found that at least the evidence of the wife to the effect that she has no objection for the partition was not secured into the record by the assessee HUF and, therefore, he held that the order of the ITO refusing recognition to the partition would set up before him in quite legal and valid. Thus, he found no merit in the appeal and had dismissed it by his order dt.31st January 1981. 4. Further aggrieved, the assessee came up in second appeal before this Tribunal and thus the matter stands before us. We have heard Sri. B.L. Gupta, the ld. Counsel for the assessee and Sri.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....w. 5. On the hand, the ld. Departmental representative relied upon the orders of the lower authorities as well as the position of law enunciated under Mulla's Hindu Law, already quoted above. Further he tried to distinguish the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court cited on behalf of the assessee by stating that in the facts of the said case, no member of the joint family was left out without being given any share. The only point considered by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in that case was whether allotment of share to an outsider of the family renders the partition void. However, in this case, the fact remains that a member of a joint family who is lawfully entitled for a share was altogether left out of consideration. Thus in....