1990 (11) TMI 79

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The following question has been referred for the opinion of this court : "Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in determining the status of the assessee as Hindu undivided family in respect of the income from securities at Rs. 21,922 and from house property at Rs. 13,128, ?" The facts ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ure disappeared. Thus, all the incidents of a joint Hindu family property became operative. The Income-tax Officer rejected the claim of the assessee. The assessee having failed before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner filed a second appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held in favour of the assessee and excluded Rs. 35,050 holding that to be the income of a Hindu undivided family. Mr. S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cannot be held to have laid down the correct law in this regard. After giving due consideration to the provisions of section 27(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as also to the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, it has been held by his Lordship Uday Sinha J., in the subsequent Patna case, CIT v. Maharaja Chintamani Saran Nath Sah Deo [1986] 157 ITR 358, that the income-tax pertaining ....