INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Vs. SARDAR VIRENDRASINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, with regard to six assessments for the years 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58, 195.8-59, 1959-60 and 1960-61. A common case has been stated as common question of law arises. . The question arises out of the Tribunal's common appellate order in respect of these assessment years, the assesses being the same.

(2.) THE facts necessary for the disposal of this reference; are that Sardar Narayanrao Bolia was a jagirdar in the former Holkar State. He died on March 19, 1932, leaving behind two widows, viz., Smt. Laxmibai and Smt. Shakuntalabai. He had no issue. He left a will dated March 7, 1932, under which, he expressed his desire that one Kanoji Bolia, his younger brother, should be taken in adoption by his senior widow. THE adoption could not be carried out, it appears, as it could not be done without the sanction of the Ruler and by orders dated May 19., 1932, the Maharaja of Holkar directed the estate to be placed under the court of wards. On January 6, 1935, Laxmibai filed an application before His Highness Maharaja of Holkar for payment of maintenance as per. nemuh. Ultimately, on. January 12, 1935, His Highness sanctioned the adoption of Kumar Virendrasingh, who is the assessce in the present case, and on the same day also directed that monthly allowance be paid to Laxmibai at the rate of Rs. 500 per month. By a subsequent order dated April 18, 1944, His Highness further directed that maintenance at the same rate, i.e., Rs. 500 per month, be paid to Shakuntalabai also. By a subsequent order dated June 16, 1948, this allowance was raised to Rs. 600 per month payable to both widows. THE question that arose before the tribunal was as to whether the amount of maintenance which was paid to these two widows was under a legal obligation and, therefore, overriding title and as such did not form part of the assessee's total income, and that is the question referred in this reference.

(3.) THIS apparently confers jurisdiction on the Government of the State to fix the maintenance allowance and it is in exercising these powers under Section 16 that the ultimate order of June 16, 1948, was passed by the then Ruler of Holkar State enhancing the allowance to the two widows Axing it at Rs. 600 per month. Learned counsel appearing for the department did not contend that this order was not under Section 16 of the Jagir Manual. It is also not disputed that the orders passed by the Ruler under Section 16 would be the orders having the force of law and it is also not disputed that the Jagir Manual of the Holkar State has not been repealed.