The Tribunal rejected the companytention.
19,1963 of the Mysore High Court in I. T. R. C. No.
Under the deed of partner ship, Shyam Sundar and Girdharlal were each entitled to a seventh share and the remaining five sevenths share was to belong to Kishanchand as karta of the Hindu undivided family.
The Tribunal then referred under s. 66 1 of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922, the following question to the High Court of Mysore for opinion Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the dividend income from shares standing in the name of Kishanchand Lunidasingh Bajaj and acquired with the funds of the Hindu undivided family of which the said person was the karta was assessable in the hands of the assessee family ?
On August 23, 1956 a partnership was formed between Kishanchand representing the Hindu undivided family of himself and his five sons and Shyam Sundar and Girdharial, for carrying on the business of Messrs. Mangoomal Kishanchand.
91,000 in value, in public limited companypanies.
Dividends received in respect of the shares were credited to the profit loss account of the firm.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURJSIDCTION Civil Appeal No.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated July.
6 of 1963.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. Kishanchand Bajaj and his seven sons formed a Hindu undivided family which owned shares exceeding Rs.
The Income tax Officer rejected that companytention.
In proceedings for assessment of the firm for the year 1959 60 it was claimed that the shares which stood registered in the name of Kishanchand belonged number to the Hindu undivided family but to the firm of Messrs. Mangoomal Kishanchand.
Srinivavan and R. Gopalakrishnan, for the appellant.
K. Daphtary, Attorney General, R. Ganapathy Iyer, R. H. Dhebar and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondent.
The order of the Income tax Office was companyfirmed in appeal by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
234 of 1965.
He held that the Hindu undivided family was the real and legal owner of the shares, and that the shares were at numbertime the property of the firm.
The family companymenced business in money lending and gs companymission agents on May 16, 1956 in the name of Messrs. Mangoomal Kishanchand and in the books of account of the firm the shares which stood registered in the name of Kishanchand with the companypanies were credited as capital of the business.
On August 22, 1956 Shyam Sundar and Girdharlal, two of the sons of Kishanchand separated from the family, each receiving rupees two lakhs in lieu of his share.
In ,,second appeal to the Income tax Appellate Tribunal it was companytended on behalf of the Hindu undivided family Oat the dividend from the shares companyld be assessed only in the hands of the person who held ownership legal as well as equitable in the shares, and as the family had ceased to be the equitable owner of the shares, the Hindu undivided family companyld number be assessed under the Income tax Act, 1922 on the dividend.
