TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1939 (2) TMI 10
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is answered in the negative, can an individual, by merely inheriting a share in property under Mohamedan Law and without committing any act or omission of his own volition, be a member of an association of individuals under Section 3 of the Burma Income tax Act?" and thirdly, "Is the omission of the nine co-heirs in the present case to realise the shares of the property left to them by their father and mother under Mohamedan Law and which they are free to realise at any time, and the appointment of one of their number as their agent, sufficient to constitute them an association of individuals within the meaning of Section 3 of the Burma Income Tax Act?" The facts which give rise to these questions are that one A.M. Baporia died in the ye....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... upon its own peculiar facts and circumstances. When we find, as we do find in this case, that there is a combination of persons formed for the promotion of a joint enterprise banded together if I may so put it, as co-adventurers-to use an archaic expression-then I think no difficulty whatever arises in the way of saying that in this particular case these four persons did constitute an 'association of individuals' within the meaning of both Section 3 and Section 55 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922." With that passage I respectfully agree. It would be unfortunate indeed, if a decision, which must necessarily depend in each particular case upon a different set of circumstances, were taken as being an attempt to define, or to lay ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t there was an association, within the meaning of the section. Not only that, but we are informed that they had, for the purpose of managing these properties, confided their interest, each of them, to one and the same individual, Mr. M.A. Baporia, and in the case which Dr. Rauf cited to us in support of his contention that there was no real measure of agreement among the co-sharers of the property, the Bench carefully reserved from their consideration the existence of any such circumstances. In the Commissioner of Income-tax v. Muhammad Aslam, the judgment remarks: "We express no opinion as to what the position would be if the co-owners of an income-producing property appointed one or more persons, whether from among themselv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... were an association of individuals after the passing of a preliminary decree for partition, and Panckridge, J., said: "With regard to the contention that the owners are an association of individuals within the meaning of section 3, it is enough to say that this point is not raised in the letter of reference." His subsequent observations are, therefore, in the nature of obiter dicta. He continued: "In my opinion, however, the words 'other association of individuals' must be construed according to the ejusdem generis rule with reference to the word 'firm' preceding it and they do not cover the members of a formerly undivided Mitakshara family after a preliminary decree for partition has been made." This e....