1988 (3) TMI 33

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he case, the jajamani income of the individual coparcener can be included in the taxable income of the Hindu undivided family ? " Since the same question is involved for each of the years, the references were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment. Priesthood is a hereditary source of earning of the members of the family since the time of ancestors. The male members act as priests for various families known as "Purohits" and are remunerated for the same. In the year 1935, there was a partition among the members of the joint family. In the deed of partition dated March 13, 1935, the families of jajamans were partitioned areawise and all the householders of the eastern side of the Raja Street area known as Sankarpur ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted functions involving recitation of vedic mantras and performances of skilled yagnic rites. The need for them on auspicious ceremonies like weddings is actually felt. Their specialised skill is necessary for the sradha ceremony. They perform pujas before deities. Thus, the priests are trained and skilled in the art of performing these vedic rites. Since the persons acting as priests acquire a right to earn income by carrying on such profession only because of their birth in a particular family, it was held by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner that the income is joint family income. The second appellate authority, the Appellate Tribunal, found that jajamani is a profession which is a hereditary occupation of the assessee family. Thus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ni Ram. According to learned counsel, the hereditary profession of Mani Ram was that of a priest and whatever he earned while practising that profession and all his acquisitions should be held to be joint family property ...... In support of the contention that the income derived from practice of a hereditary profession should be construed as ancestral property, learned counsel referred us to two decisions in Ghelabhai Gavrishankar v. Hargowan Ramji [1912] ILR 36 Bom 94 and Hanso Patak v. Harmandil Patak, AIR 1934 All 851. Neither of the cases support the contention of learned counsel. In the first case, the question that arose for consideration was the nature of the office of a hereditary priest. It was held that the hereditary right of th....