1993 JTR(SC) 172
1994 Supp2 SCC 112
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.N.Venkatachaliah, C.J.I., B.P.Jeevan Reddy, J.
Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax
Versus
M.Karthikeyan
Case No. : 1330 of 1982
Date of Decision : 2/24/93
A son's share in his father's assets, inherited under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, is considered his separate and individual property and not joint family property.
Act
Referred
:HINDU SUCCESSION ACT
: S.8
(A) Hindu Succession Act - Section 8 - Income Tax Act, 1922 - Section 25-A - Share in father's assets - Nature of property - Whether the share obtained by a son in the assets of his deceased father is separate property or joint family property - Share obtained by the son is governed by Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act and is therefore his separate property. (Para 2)
Facts of the case:
A partition occurred between a father and his five sons, which was recorded by the tax authorities. Following the father's death, the son obtained a share in the father's assets. The dispute centered on whether this share, specifically in a partnership firm, constituted the son's separate and individual property or the property of the joint family consisting of the son and his own sons.
Findings of Court:
The share obtained by the son in the assets of the father is governed by Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act and is consequently the separate property of the son.
Issues: Whether the share in a partnership firm obtained by the assessee from his father's assets constituted separate and individual property or property of the joint family.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that assets inherited by a son under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act are treated as separate property rather than joint family property, adhering to established judicial precedents.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
Facts of the case:
A partition occurred between a father and his five sons, which was recorded by the tax authorities. Following the father's death, the son obtained a share in the father's assets. The dispute centered on whether this share, specifically in a partnership firm, constituted the son's separate and individual property or the property of the joint family consisting of the son and his own sons.
Findings of Court:
The share obtained by the son in the assets of the father is governed by Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act and is consequently the separate property of the son.
Issues: Whether the share in a partnership firm obtained by the assessee from his father's assets constituted separate and individual property or property of the joint family.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that assets inherited by a son under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act are treated as separate property rather than joint family property, adhering to established judicial precedents.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
Succession - Followed the precedent that shares obtained under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act constitute separate property.
Succession - Established that the share obtained by a son in the father's assets under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act is his separate property.
(1) THIS appeal is preferred against the judgment of the Madras High court answering the question referred to it, at the instance of the Revenue, against the Revenue. The question referred is :
"WHETHER on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessees share in the partnership firm of M/s Erode Service constituted a separate and individual property and not the property of the joint family consisting of himself and his five sons?"
(2) ONE Angappa Mudaliar had five sons including the assessee. There was complete partition among Angappa Mudaliar and his five sons in the year 1943. The said partition was also accepted and recorded by the Income Tax Department under Section 25-A of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922. Angappa Mudaliar died on 25/01/1962 leaving behind him certain assets. The question is whether the share obtained by the assessee in his fathers assets in his separate property? The High court has answered it saying that it is governed by Section 8 of Hindu Succession Act and therefore the said share is his separate property. This question has since been concluded by the decision of this court in CWT v. Chander Sen which has also been followed in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. P.L. Karuppan Chettiar. It is held that in such circumstances the share obtained by the son is governed by Section 8 of Hindu Succession Act and therefore his separate property. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.