Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1963 (3) TMI 1

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 387.83 was levied. This was for the assessment year 1958-59. From the said assessment the respondents appealed to the Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Thanjavur, and contended that they should not to be treated as an " association of individuals " and that each one of them should be assessed individually in regard to his share of the agricultural income. This contention was not accepted by the appellate authority and the appeal failed. The respondents preferred a further appeal to the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, and reiterated their contention that they did not constitute an " association of individuals ". The Tribunal upheld their contention and remanded the proceedings to the Income-tax Officer fo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and the balance of about Ac. 183-11 were leased out in favour of forty-seven tenants. The pannai cultivation was done under a common management and a common account was maintained showing the income from the lands and the expenses incurred for deriving the income. In respect of the lands leased out to tenants, seeds and cultivation expenses were advanced from a common account and they were recouped at the time of the harvest. At the end of each year the net agricultural income was apportioned among the four respondents in the ratio of their holdings. For the assessment year 1958-59 they submitted separate returns in respect of their respective share income. The Agricultural Income-tax Officer, however, treated them as one entity, an "ass .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ociation of individuals " is no doubt a taxable entity both under the Madras Agricultural Income-tax Act as well as under the Indian Income-tax Act. Neither of these Acts has defined this expression. What is chargeable to tax is the income of the collective body. It is only a comprehensive expression denoting the individual composing or forming the group or body. The mere collectiveness is insufficient to constitute an association within the meaning of the said Acts. That term indicates, quite clearly, a common purpose and a joint action. Without the cementing force of a unity of purpose resulting in income there can be no chargeable association. A common object to earn income, a joint endeavour towards that end, and a resultant income, bei .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Amir-ud-din of Lahore, In re considered the question whether a common management of the property of certain Muslim co-heirs would clothe them with the character and status of "association of individuals "under the Indian Income-tax Act. The view taken was that per se such a management would not make them an association. The assessees in that case were the co-heirs of a Muhammadan who inherited the property of the deceased in specific shares under the Muslim law. They did not partition the property and the rent deeds stood in their joint names. They had employed a munshi to manage the property and to collect the rents and the income. After deducting the cost of collection and the other expenses the net income was distributed in accordance wi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an association of persons in respect of the entire income. The High Court held that as their shares in the property were definite and ascertainable, the special provision of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Indian Income-tax Act would apply and that they could not be assessed as an association of persons in respect of the income from such property, but the one-third share of each widow had to be included in her total income as an individual. The view of the Bombay High Court was that section 9(3) of the Income-tax Act was a special provision and cases falling within that provision would not attract the provisions of the general charging section, viz., section 3. At page 329, Chagla C. J. stated the position thus: "This is a case where .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates