1. Family consisting of female Members
(i) Whether a joint Hindu family can comprise of females only
A joint Hindu
family continues to exist even through at a particular time there may be no
male coparcener provided of course there is a “potential mother” in the family,
that is to say, the window of a deceased coparcener, who is capable of bringing
in a male member by way of adoption.
It was held by
Allahabad High court in CIT v. Sarwan kumar [1945] 13 ITR 361 (ALL.) that there
can be HUF consisting of female members only. They held that females are and
can be component parts of an undivided Hindu family. The court Observed “that
being so, there can be in our judgement, an undivided Hindu family consisting
of females only.
The coparcenary,
no doubt comes to an end with the disappearance of the last male member, but as
already pointed out, the existence of coparcenery is not essential for the
existence of a joint Hindu family”
Similarly, in
the case of Savitri Devi v.CIT [1976] 104 ITR 385 (Pat.) it was held that the
window and her unmarried daughter constituted a HUF even when the window had
not adopted a son.
(whether two females of a family can, by agreement constitute a joint Hindu family in regard to their individual properties
Where the
members HUF, being females, inherit something individually, they cannot
constitute a HUF by agreement by pooling up their inherited property. In this
context, a reference could also be made to the decision of the Supreme court in
the case of Puspa Devi vs. CIT 1977 CTR (SC) 348 (1977) 109 ITR 730 (SC): TC
37R. 168,
Where the
supreme court has held that it was a fundamental notion governing a joint Hindu
family that a female member of the joint family cannot blend her separate
property, even if she is the absolute owner there of, with the joint family
property. This judgement covered a case where there was already a joint family
in existence and held that, even so, a female cannot blend her absolute
property there with other females a HUF and blends the property of her absolute
ownership therewith.
However, where
there is already an HUF and its members get reduced only to females, say by
death of male members, it would continue to be assessed as a joint Hindu family
as long as there are two females, as decided in the cases referred to earlier.
2. Smaller HUF
Where the
assessee, having wife but no child, got certain property on partition of his
bigger HUF, it was held that the assessee’s claim for HUF status was valid and
had to be accepted despite the fact that the assessee did not have a son-CIT v.
Krishna Kumar [1982] 10 Taxman 292(MP).
No comments:
Post a Comment