SETH MATHURADAS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MADHYA PRADESH AND BHOPAL :SETH MATHURADAS
LAWS(SC)-1960-11-31
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: MADHYA PRADESH)
Decided on November 22,1960

SETH MATHURADAS,COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Appellant
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,M.P.,BHOPAL,SETH MATHURADAS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Kapur, J. - (1.)These are two cross appeals which arise out of two orders and judgments of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Nagpur. The appellant in Civil Appeal No. 139 of 1956 is the assessee and that in Civil Appeal No. 207 of 1959 is the Commissioner of Income-tax.
(2.)The facts of the case are these. Civil Appeal No. 139 of 1956 relates to assessment years 1944-45, 1945-46, 1946-47 and 1947-48 and Civil Appeal No. 207 of 1959 relates to the assessment years 1948-49 and 1949-50. The accounting years in both the appeals were Samvat years. The Appellant in C. A. No. 139 of 1956 was the karta of a Hindu undivided family which consisted of the appellant, his wife and three sons. The family owned endorsed various movable and immoveable properties and business and were being assessed as a Hindu undivided family. The appellant as the karta of the family brought about a distribute of the Hindu undivided family. There was a partition on October 16, 1944, and the deed of partition was executed on December 30, 1944, and was register on January 2, 1945. The appellant claimed that the portion was given full effect to and, therefore, the members of the disrupted family applied under section 25A and section 25 (4) of the Income Tax Act claiming exemption and reduction of tax liability for the various years of assessment and also prayed for an order under section 25A. the Income-tax Officer rejected the application holding that there was no partition as alleged by the appellant and that the deed of partition was not meant to be acted upon. The appellant then went in appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner which was dismissed and so was the appeal to the Tribunal. The appellant applied under section 66 (1) for a reference to the High Court on five questions of law but this application was also dismissed. Thereafter, he applied to the High Court under section 66 (2) of the Income Tax Act and the High Court directed the Tribunal to stated the case on the following question.
"Whether there is in this case any legal evidence to support the inference of the Tribunal that the partition in question was not genuine and meant to be acted upon -

(3.)"The partition in question" which was set up was one dated October 16, 1944. The case was stated but the reference was decided against the appellant. Against that order the appellant has come to this court on a certificate of the High Court. In our opinion no question of law arises in this appeal. It was held by the Tribunal, on the material before it, that the partition was not acted upon. In our opinion, the High Court, on this finding, rightly held against the appellant. The appeal is therefore dismissed with costs.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.