1979 (6) TMI 97

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... accepted the assessee's claim that the HUF consisted of only the Karta and his wife, that the Karta being the sole coparcener was entitled to alienate the family property, that the gift was by the Karta to his wife and that therefore the gift was exempt under s. 5(1)(viii) of the G.T. Act. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Jana Veera Bhadrayya v. CGT reported in 59 ITR 176. The AAC therefore held that the assessee was entitled to exemption. The Department has come on appeal before us against the above order of the AAC. 4. The assessee was not present when the appeal was taken up for hearing. He had however sent a letter supporting the order of the AAC and drawing out attention to the fol....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the family assets was gifted to the wife and therefore the exemption claimed is not admissible. We are unable to agree. It is well settled that a sole coparcener holding coparcenery property is entitled to dispose of it as if it was his separate property vide Mulla's Hindu Law, thirteenth edition, page 290, paragraph 257 which reads as follows: "A person who for the time being is the sole surviving coparcener is entitled to dispose of the coparcenery property as if it were his separate property. He may sell or mortgage the property without legal necessity on he may make a gift of it. If as on is subsequently born to him or adopted by him, the alienation, whether it is by way of sale, mortgage or gift, will nevertheless stand for a so....