Gupta, J. - (1.) The point for consideration is the same in these two sets of appeals brought on certificate granted by the High Court of Madras. M.P. Peria Karuppan Chettiar, appellant in Civil Appeals Nos. 1090 1092 of 1970, is a brother of M. R. M. Ramaswami Chettiar, appellant m Civil Appeals Nos. 1093 and 1094 of 1970. The appeals preferred by M. P. Peria Karuppan Chettiar anise out of a reference under S. 66 (1) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, Section 27 (I) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, and Section 26 (1) of the Gift Tax Act, 1958 made at the instance of the Commissioner of Income tax, Wealth Tax, and Gift Tax, Madras, for determination of the following questions:-"1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the status of the assessee was correctly determined as Hindu Undivided Family for the Income tax, Wealth Tax and Gift-tax assessments of 1959-60; 1957-58 and 1958-59 respectively
(2.) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rupees 1,60,000/- transferred to the account of Muthukaruppan and Palaniappan (sons of Peria Karuppan Chettiar) in the previous year ending on 13-4-1958 was liable to assessment under the Gift Tax Act The reference under the Income Tax Act relates to the assessment year l959-60, under the Wealth Tax Act to the assessment year 1957-58, the valuation date being April 12, 1857, and under the Gift Tax Act to the assessment year 1958-59. 2. The appeal by M. R. M. Ramaswami Chettiar arises out of a reference under Section 27 (1) of the Wealth Tax Act at the instance of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Madras for a decision on the following question: "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the assessee's status is that of a Hindu Undivided Family for the assessment year 1959-60 and 1960-61 - The status of the assessee in either group of appeals would depend on a correct construction of two documents executed in 1932 by their father - Muthukaruppan Chettiar. The relevant facts are briefly as follows. Muthakaruppan Chettiar had business interests and other properties both in Ceylon and India. He had four sons, Narayanan, Rarnaswami (Appellant in C. As. Nos. l093 and 1094 of 1970), Periakaruppan (appellant in Civil Appeals Nos. 1090 1092 of 1970) and Palaniappan. By two deeds, both executed on April 26, 1932 Muthukaruppan Chettier conveyed by way of gift all his business interests and properties in Ceylon to his first three sons. It is stated that the fourth son who was a minor at the time was i given cash and properties in India equal to one-fourth of the value of his father's entire assets. For some time following the execution of the deeds of gift Narayanan, Ramaswami and Periakaruppan carried on the business in Ceylon in partnership. Muthukaruppan Chettiar died in May 1932. On December 20, 1950 a deed was executed by the four brothers partitioning the residue of their father's properties. Till the assessment year 1957-58, Periakaruppan filed returns in the status of an individual and was assessed as such. For the first time in the assessment year 1958-59 he claimed to be assessed in the status of a Hindu Undivided family consisting of himself and his two sons Muthukaruppan and Palaniappan The Income-tax Officer rejected this claim and the assessment for the aforesaid assessment year became final. Thereafter Periakaruppan transferred to each of his two sons a sum of Rs. 30,000/- and Rs. 50,000/on May 14, 1957 and January 12, 1958 respectively. In the income-tax assessment for the assessment year 1959-60, the previous year ending on April 13, 1959, Periakaruppan again claimed the status of a Hindu Undivided Family. The claim was again rejected by the Income-tax Officer.
(3.) Also in the wealth-tax proceedings for the assessment year 1957-58, valuation date being April 12, 1957, Periakaruppan claimed the status of a Hindu Undivided Family. The Wealth-tax Officer rejected the claim.;