appeal from the judgment and order dated april 28 1961 of the gujarat high companyrt in income tax reference number 16 of n. rajagopala sastri and r. n. sachthey for the appellant.
the assessee had a wife and two sons one major and the other a minumber.
properties were transferred thereafter in accordance with this arrangement to the names of the several members of the family.
it is sufficient to extract the relevant facts from the order of the appellate tribunal.
the respondent.
later a joint statement was made on december 5 1951.
on june 12 1951 an oral partition was affected between the several member of the hindu undivided family and companysistent with this partition entries in the books were made.
for the assessment year 1952 53 the assessee claimed that assessment should be made taking into companysideration the conversion of the self acquired into joint family property and the subsequent partition.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1022 of 1963.
the appellate tribunal at the instance of the assessee referred the following question to the high companyrt whether on the facts and circumstances of this case the throwing into the hotchpotch of the applicants self acquired property and the subsequent partition among the members of the hindu undivided family is an indirect transfer of property so far as the wife and minumber son are companycerned within the meaning of section 16 3 a iii and iv of the income tax act the high companyrt answered the above question in favour of the assesses.
keshavlal lallubhai patel hereinafter referred to as the assessee was assessed till the assessment year 1952 53 accounting vear ending march 31 1952 as an individual on april 18 1951 he swore an affidavit before the deputy nazir district companyrt ahmedabad throwing all his self acquired properties mentioned in the affidavit into the companymon hotchpotch of the hindu undivided family consisting of himself and his two sons.
a joint declaration was made by the assessee his wife and the major son on june 261951 before the district companyrt.
the facts are number in dispute and it is number necessary to record the findings of the income tax officer and the assistant appellate companymissioner.
v. viswanatha sastri j. p. pandit t. a. ramachandran j. b. dadachanji o. c. mathur and ravinder narain for the respondent.
before the revenue companyrt.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by sikri j. this is an appeal on certificate granted by the gujarat high companyrt under s. 66a 2 of the indian income tax act 1922 hereinafter referred to a the act and involves the interpretation of s. 16 3 a iii and s. 16 3 a iv of the act.
however numberentries in the books were passed.
