TMI Blog1949 (9) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax Act. Sri Sital Chandra Banerji, a pious Hindu governed by the Dayabhaga School of Hindu law, dedicated very valuable properties to two idols--Sri Sri Iswar Sita, and Sri Sri Iswar Ram--by an Arpannama dated 31st March, 1922. The Income-tax Officer assessed the assessee under Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act and assessed the deities as an association of persons at the maximum rate on the ground that the shares of the beneficiaries were indeterminate. An appeal was preferred to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who set aside the assessment and held that the shares of the deities were determinate and the entire income was equally divisible between the two deities. Under the Arpannama the settlor dedicated to the sai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en there is a gift or bequest to two deities without any specification of shares the deities are equally entitled to both the corpus and the income of the properties and they should be taxed as such. There is no room for the contention that the shares were indeterminate or unknown under the proviso to Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act. Dr. Gupta urged before us that in this case having regard to the deed of dedication a small amount has been prescribed by the dedicator for the Seva and Bhog of the deities and that a number of provisions has been made for periodical worship, maintenance of poor students, performance of other pujas, support of helpless Brahmin widows etc. He urges that the income which will be really available for the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e shebaits in charge of the deities were being taxed under Section 9 of the Income-tax Act, and the tax was levied on the whole of the income of the dedicated properties which was realised by the shebaits on behalf of the deities without making any deduction for the charities and other religious or pious uses mentioned in the Arpannama. We have held that the two deities are co-owners of the properties in equal shares and, therefore, each of them is also the owner of a moiety of the income. There is thus for assessment purposes no question of a variable income for the deities which was indeterminate. Whatever may be paid by the shebaits for the maintenance of the Athithiseva or the poor students or the Brahmin widows, or for other purposes, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. The only question was whether the share of each deity was half of the total income, i.e., whether their shares were defined and known. In my opinion it is not open to Dr. Gupta at this stage to urge the new point which he now seeks to make. Inasmuch as the assessment has been made on the whole of the income of the Thakurs it is immaterial that the deities through the shebaits have to make payments to other persons and the amount which may be available to the deities is variable or indeterminate. It is equally immaterial that the shebaits as managers of the deities receive the income but have to make payments to or to provide for a large and somewhat indefinite group of persons and charities. Therefore, the question set out in the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
