BALASANJANNA P C Vs. FOURTH GIFT TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition for the issue of a writ of prohibition or other appropriate writ prohibiting the respondent from further preceding with his proposal to assess the petitioner to gift-tax pursuant to his notice under Section 16(1) of the Gift-tax Act was heard by us along with T. C. Nos. 272 of 1964, 10 of 1966, etc. Commissioner of Gift-tax v. P. Rangaswami Naidu, 1970 76 ITR 315 raising a common question of law. On February 8, 1965, the petitioner was called upon by the respondent to submit a return under the Gift-tax Act pointing out that the officer had reason to believe that a gift made by the petitioner was assessable to gift-tax for the assessment year 1962-63. THEreupon the petitioner represented to the respondent that all he had done was to throw into the hotchpot of his family his self-acquired property making a declaration to that effect, that there was no transfer of property within the meaning of the Gift-tax Act and that, therefore, no liability was incurred under the Act. In the absence of acceptance by the revenue of the stand taken by him to gift-tax the petitioner has applied for the issue of a writ of prohibition.

(2.) THE petitioner's contention is that there is no gift within the meaning of the Gift-tax Act, when the father in a Hindu undivided family throws his separate property into the hotchpot of the joint family and impresses the property with the character of joint family property. In the counter-affidavit filed for the revenue, a point is taken that the writ petition is premature and misconceived, and that the petitioner has rushed to this court refusing even to file return and without giving to the Gift-tax Officer an opportunity to enter his findings on the objection of the petitioner.