1983 (3) TMI 5

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rcumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the applicant-Hindu undivided family has to be assessed at a higher rate as a specified Hindu undivided family under the Wealth-tax Act. The Tribunal has held that the applicant-Hindu undivided family has to be assessed at a higher rate as it comes under sub-paragraph (1A) of para. A of Part I of the Schedule to the Wealth-tax Act ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rcener with female members can constitute a Hindu undivided family. If the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee is to be accepted, then the Hindu undivided family contemplated under sub-paragraph (1A) of para. of Part I of the Schedule can only be a Hindu undivided family with at least two coparceners as members. But we do not see any justification for restricting the operation of su....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CWT [1969] 74 ITR 190, the Supreme Court has laid down that under the Hindu system of law, a joint family can consist of a single male member and his wife and daughters and there is nothing in the scheme of the Wealth-tax Act to suggest that a Hindu undivided family as an assessable unit must consist of at least two male members. Again the Supreme Court in Surjit Lal Chhabda v. CIT [1975] 101 ITR ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....raph (1A) of para. A of Part I of the Schedule to the Wealth-tax Act will apply only to a Hindu undivided family which has at least two male members and that it will not apply to a Hindu undivided family consisting of one male member and other female members. It is significant to note that the word used in sub-paragraph (1A) of para. A of Part I of the Schedule is " member " and not " male member ....