SAJJANSINH N. CHAUHAN Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these tax appeals which are relatable to one assessment year, namely, assessment year 1989-90, and which arise from common order dated 22-4-1999 made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal) have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Vide two orders dated 17-1-2007, the appeals have been admitted on following substantial questions of law:

(3.) The appellant assessee is an HUF. The Karta of the HUF is the son and heir of deceased Maharaja Naharsinhji Fatehsinhji, younger son of the Maharaja of Chhota Udepur. Late Naharsinhji was granted by the Maharaja six villages, including Zar and Dadigam of Chhota Udepur Taluka in 1990 by Sanad dated 22-12-1990. The said Jagir came to be abolished by operation of the Bombay Merged Territories and Areas (Jagirs Abolition) Act, 1953 (the Jagir Abolition Act) with effect from 1-8-1954. Naharsinhji had made an application for compensation and Jagir Abolition Officer, Baroda had made an award on 29-7-1959 for an amount of Rs. 38,456 under Section 11(3) of the Jagir Abolition Act. However, it appears that no claim for compensation in respect of forest areas of the two villages, namely, Zar and Dadigam, admeasuring about 2,500 acres and the trees standing thereon, was made on the footing that according to Jagirdar, the said lands (areas) had not vested in the State Government.