TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (2) TMI 7
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a school of Hindu law dying intestate could form a joint Hindu family by means of agreement? (ii) Whether the female heirs of a Hindu governed by the Dayabhaga school of Hindu law dying intestate could impress upon their inherited property the character of joint family property? (iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, one-third of the properties inherited from her husband was assessable in the hands of the assessee in the status of an individual?" The High Court answered the first and second questions in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee and the third question in the negative and against the Revenue. The brief facts leading to the reference are these: One Har Govind Dutta, a Hindu governed b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le, of a Hindu governed by the Dayabhaga school dying intestate by throwing an ascertained share into the hotchpot by agreement. The High Court was in error in its reading of the judgment of this court in the case of Gauri Shankar Bhar [1972] 84 ITR 699. This court held, in view of the concession that each one of the heirs of a deceased, governed by the Dayabhaga school, took a definite share in the property left by him. that it was not necessary to decide whether a Dayabhaga Hindu family could be considered a Hindu undivided family within the meaning of section 3 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. It held that, on the facts of the case, the heirs had taken the property of the deceased in separate shares; therefore, in law, each of them was li....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d her absolute property therewith. The ratio applies as much when a female purports to create by agreement with other females a Hindu undivided family and blends the property of her absolute ownership therewith. The assessee-respondent has not put in an appearance. Since a question of law was involved, we had requested Mr. B. Sen to assist us, which he has very kindly done. He has drawn our attention to the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in CWT v. Gouri Shankar Bhar [1968] 68 ITR 345, which judgment was considered by this court in Gawri Shankar Bhar's case [1972] 84 ITR 699. Mr. Sen drew our attention to the observation therein that under the Dayabhaga school a joint family amongst brothers was a creation not of law but of a desire ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....status. The Tribunal also cited the judgment of this court in CIT v. Rm. Ar. Ar. Veerappa Chettiar [1970] 76 ITR 467. The Tribunal rightly noted that this court had there held that so long as the property which was originally of a joint Hindu family remained in the hands of the widows of the members of the family and was not divided among them, the joint family continued. The conclusion that the Tribunal drew from this was erroneous, namely, "Thus according to the Supreme Court also only females can also form a joint Hindu family." In the present case, as aforestated, the assessee and her two daughters inherited in their individual capacity a one-third share each in the estate of the deceased. We have no authority before us which can lea....