DARBAR PRATAPSINHJI AHMEDABAD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following three question have bee referred to us for our opinion :

(2.) THESE three questions arise in the following circumstances : The assessee's father, Narendrasinhji, was the Ruler or Darbr of the erstwhile Staet of Patdi in Saurashtra. He died in the year 1941, and the assessee ascended to the Gaddi and became the Ruler or Darbar of the said State of Patdi. The assessee inherited the properties in question and other properties also which formed part of the impartible estate. The relevant assessment years for the purposes of this reference are 1965 66 and 1966 67, the years of accounts being S. Ys. 2020 and 2021, respectively. The assessee was filing returns of his income as an individual right from the asst. yr. 1949 50 to the asst. yr. 1964 65, and he was assessed accordingly. For the asst. yr. 1965 66, the assessee filed his return of income as an individual. However, in the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee claimed a status as that of a "HUF". It appear that by his letter of 2nd June, 1967, he contended before the ITO that he had ceased to be a ruler and that since the rule of primogeniture was no longer applicable to his properties, his estate ceased to be impartible. He further contended that his right in lands and villages was also abolished in 1957.

(3.) AT the time of hearing of this reference, the learned Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the assessee, raised the following two contentions :