TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1982 (4) TMI 42
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....imed that the immovable properties mentioned in Part IV of the returns belonged to his wife, sons and daughters, to whom they had been gifted in 1946. The assessee, therefore, requested that these properties should not be included in his wealth. The assessee, further claimed that his correct status should be taken as that of an individual and the returns filed by him in the status of an HUF should be treated as amended to that extent. According to the assessee, his father, Rai Sheo Prasad, died in 1935 leaving behind his son, the present assessee, and his widow. The assessee married in 1939 under the Special Marriage Act. His mother died in 1943 and the aforesaid gift was made by him on December 30, 1946, by means of a registered document i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appeal before the Appellate Tribunal and urged the same contentions before it. The Tribunal found that even after making a gift of the Zamindari, properties to his wife, Smt. Krishna Mohini, and five minor children, it was the assessee who continued to exercise control over the gifted property. The sale proceeds of the various properties sold by the donees were credited by the assessee in his bank account and interest earned on that account was shown as the income of the assessee. According to the Tribunal the assessee really did not intend to hand over the gifted properties to the donees. In other words, the gift was not intended to be acted upon. It also found that even though the marriage of the assessee took place under the provisions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the dispute relates to income-tax assessments. The assessee had filed his income-tax returns for these years as karta of HUF, but during the assessment proceedings he claimed that his correct status was that of an individual and the income from the properties, which he bad gifted to his wife and children in 1946 should not be assessed in his hands. The ITO rejected that contention and completed the assessments taking the status of the assessee as that of an HUF. The income from the property claimed by the assessee to have been gifted to his wife and minor children was included in these assessments. The assessee filed appeals against those assessment orders; but remained unsuccessful and then took up the matter in further appeal before t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... consisted of agricultural land and after the enforcement of the Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, the donees, whose names were duly mutated in the revenue papers over the property gifted, acquired fresh rights as bhumidhars. These rights were distinct from the rights conferred by the gift deed and that being so, the income from these properties could not be treated as belonging to the HUF nor could the income therefrom be treated as the income of the HUF. We do not find any merit in any of these submissions. It cannot be disputed that after the death of Rai Sheo Prasad the entire property of the family devolved on his son as the sole surviving coparcener. However, it would be taken that he constituted a joint Hindu family along wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct from the right conferred on them by the gift deed would prevail, were not taken before the Tribunal and cannot be allowed to be urged now in this reference. We, therefore, do not propose to enter into the merits of these contentions. Learned counsel invited our attention to a decision of this court in CGT v. Ram Kishan [1979] 120 ITR 589, in support of his contention that the gift deed can be taken to operate as a family arrangement and thus there was valid transfer of the properties by the assessee to his wife and children. As noted above, this contention cannot be entertained for the first time in a reference. The Appellate Tribunal is the last fact-finding authority. It had no occasion to examine this contention. The facts in this beh....