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

1984 (1) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... re that the assessee, Maharajadhiraj Himmat Singhji is the second son of late Maharaja Shri Ummed Singh, the then Ruler of the erstwhile Jodhpur State. On the death of Maharaja Shri Ummed Singh, his eldest son, the late Maharaja Shri Hanuwant Singh succeeded to the Jodhpur State. Maharaja Hanuwant Singh had four brothers including the present assessee. He gave jagirs and residential accommodations to his four brothers as their " chhut bhai bunt " and the assessee received 17 villages and a residential house in Jodhpur. The assessee is governed by the Hindu Mitakshara law and by custom as well as the Marwar Land Revenue Act, the rule of primogeniture is applicable to him. The jagir and the residential house received by the assessee is on tha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts in the names of his minor sons of a part of the realisations from the sale of the property was also treated as the individual income of the assessee. The assessee filed appeals against these assessments as he claimed that these assessments and the income from the investments out of the sale proceeds were the assets and income of the joint Hindu family of which the assessee was the " karta " and the appeals were accepted by the learned AAC. He found that the compensation received on the resumption of the jagir as also the residential house could not be treated as the individual assets of the assessee and that they were the assets of the joint Hindu family headed by the assessee. The WTO filed an appeal against the order of the learned AA .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... total income under section 64(iv) of the Income-tax Act ? " We have heard Shri Meratwal on behalf of the assessee and Shri J. P. Joshi on behalf of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax and Income-tax. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are clearly of the opinion that the questions referred to us in this reference already stand answered by various decisions of this court and, therefore, a detailed discussion of the matter is not called for. Suffice it to say that on the basis of a number of decisions of the Privy Council and the Supreme Court, this court in the decisions to which we shall presently refer, has found that where in impartible estate is governed by the Hindu Mitakshara law as also the rule of primogeniture, the hol .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f Rajasthan, which was formerly a part of the former Mewar State and was governed by the Qanoon Mal Mewar and it was not in dispute that the jagir of Badnore was ancestral and impartible and was governed by the rule of primogeniture. Later, this decision was followed by another Division Bench of this court in CWT v. Thakur Bhairon Singh [1984] 147 ITR 32. This case related to the jagir of Barkana, which was formerly the scheduled jagir in the then State of jodhpur, Marwar. In this case, the provisions of the Mewar Land Revenue Act and the Qanoon Mal Mewar were held to be analogous and the view taken in Thakur Gopal Singh's case [1975] 99 ITR 354 (Raj) was adopted. It was further observed as under (p. 38) "The assessee has merely said that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he decision by this court in Bhairon Singh's case is reported to have become final." It may be mentioned that the question in Bhairon Singh's case [1984] 147 ITR 32, as well as in Thakur Laxman Singh's case , related to the compensation received by an ex jagirdar in lieu of the resumption of the jagir. These authorities were again followed by another Division Bench of this court of which one of us was a member in Thakur Bhawani Singh v. CED (Income-tax Reference No. 8 of 1971, decided on July 13, 1983 [1984] 147 ITR 29). Yet in another case reported in Gopal Singh v. State of Rajasthan [1983] WLN 375, a learned Single judge (who is a party to the present order also) had, relying on Thakur Gopal Singh's case [1975] 99 ITR 354, held that i .....

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