1989 (2) TMI 130

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hpot of a Hindu undivided family by declaration dated 7th August, 1970. On 18th August, 1970 there was a partial partition of that property as a result of which the assessee became entitled only to 1/9th share of that property. In the land acquisition proceedings the assessee filed an application dated 3rd October, 1970 that 1/9th part of the compensation may be paid to each one of the 9 members of the HUF. Accordingly, she received her 1/9th share. However, the Income-tax Officer for the asst. year 1972-73 levied tax on the capital gains worked out on the basis of the full amount of compensation and not only on her 1/9th share. His view was based on the ground that the female member of a Hindu undivided family could not throw her property ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e no formal conveyance had been executed there was no gift. The learned D.R. argued that in view of this decision of the Tribunal, it has to be held that the property continued to be that of the assessee and consequently the compensation also. He submitted that although the compensation might have been paid to the other members of the HUF these are merely consequential which are not relevant because the ownership of the property and therefore, the right to receive the compensation was that of the assessee. In this connection, he invited our attention to the Tribunal's aforesaid order in gift-tax proceedings where his suggestion that the matter be restored to the GTO to ascertain how the property had been treated by the HUF, was rejected on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....see's counsel for valuation of the compensation money gone into the hands of the other members of the HUF he submitted that what was to be valued was the right to receive the compensation and not the actual part of it which might have gone into the hands of the other members of the HUF. 6. The learned counsel for the assessee replied that in asst. year 1972-73 there was no longer any right to receive compensation because actually compensation had in fact been received. He pointed out that for the asst. years 1971-72 to 1974-75 wealth-tax had been levied on the assessee and there was no appeal from those orders. Therefore, according to him, the assessee could not now deny her liability for the subsequent year. 7. In our view, the cruci....