RAMJI MEHROTRA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has, under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, referred to us the following question of law :

(2.) SHRI Ramji Mehrotra, the assessee, was a member of a Hindu undivided family along with his father, mother, a brother and an uncle and aunt and four cousins. In 1951, there was a partial partition in the family at which a sum of five lakhs of rupees was divided between some of the members of the family. In 1953 another partial partition took place in the family, with the result that the assessee became separated from all the other members of the family. He was a bachelor. He became the exclusive owner of the properties allotted to him at the partition. For the assessment year 1966-67, the assessee claimed in the return filed by him that his status was that of a Hindu undivided family. The Income-tax Officer did not accept this contention. He held that the assessee being the sole coparcener he did not constitute a Hindu undivided family. He assessed him in the status of an individual. This view was affirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The assessee failed before the Appellate Tribunal as well.

(3.) ON facts, the Hindu undivided family continued despite the death of the eldest male member. After his death his adopted son along with the other female members continued in the status of a Hindu undivided family. It is in this context that the court observed that the property continued to retain its status as belonging to a Hindu undivided family. This decision is an authority only for the proposition that even if some members of a Hindu undivided family, like females, may not possess powers of transfer, yet the family can continue as a Hindu undivided family and the property belonging to it retains that character.