1985 (8) TMI 127

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ch he received under a will from his father as an HUF property and the income cannot be included in his individual assessment. The ITO did not accept this submission. He held that the intention of the assessee's father that the property should be treated as joint family property is not clear from the will dated 7-8-1969 executed by him. Thus, the house property which the assessee got under the wil....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he property was given to the sons of the executor but not to their families. Hence, the AAC was wrong in holding that the property belongs to the HUF. The learned counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order of the AAC. He urged that the language of the will clearly indicates that the property was given to the sons and their families under the will dated 7-8-1969. He laid stress on the wo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... families of the three sons of the executor. In M.P. Periakaruppan Chettiar v. CIT [1975] 99 ITR 1 the Supreme Court considered the use of the words 'heirs, executors, administrators and assignees' used in the gift deeds. On the basis of the above words in the above case it was contended for the assessee that the gift was to the sons as heads of the respective families. The Supreme Court did not a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....both heritable and alienable. There is nothing in the two documents to suggest that the interest transferred to the sons was limited in any way...." The above ratio squarely applies to the instant case. There is nothing to indicate in the will dated 7-8-1969 that the property was given to the families of the three sons. There is nothing to restrict the enjoyment of the property with full rights....