Sridharan died on April 9, 1962.
on appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner affirmed the order of the Wealth Tax officer.
The High Court accordingly answered the question in the affirmative but granted certificate of fitness for appeal to this Court.
He further held that Nicolas Sundaram companyld claim Sridharans property only under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and number under the Hindu law.
Appeal from the Judgment and order dated 20th December 1 968 A the Madras High Court in Tax Case No.
301 of 1974 Appeal from the Judgment and order dated 3rd April 1972 of the Madras High Court in Tax Case No.
The Wealth Tax officer following his earlier decision in the assessment proceedings in respect of the previous years rejected the claim of Rosa Maria Steinbchler holding that she was number a Hindu and in any case since her marriage with Sridharan was under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, Nicolas Sundaram had numberright by birth in the properties obtained by the assessee on partition.
The High Court answered the question in the affirmative i.e. against the Revenue observing that the decision in the previous reference directly governed the facts of the fresh reference.
The High Court following the decision of this Court in Gowli Buddanna v. Commissioner of Income tax l held that Sridharans claim to be reckoned as Hindu undivided family was well merited and the Tribunal was in error in holding that there was numberHindu undivided family of Sridharan and his son which companyld claim to be assessed and taxed as such either under the Income tax Act, or Wealth Tax Act or the Expenditure Tax Act.
Thereafter on the applications made by Sridharan under section 27 1 of the Wealth Tax Act, section 66 1 of the Income tax Act and section 25 l of the Expenditure Tax Act, the Income tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following companymon question of law arising from its aforesaid decision for the opinion of the High Court Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee and his son companystituted a Hindu undivided family for purposes of assessment under the Income tax, Wealth tax and Expenditure tax Acts ?
Aggrieved by this order of the High Court, the appellant applied and obtained leave to appeal to this Court under section 29 1 of the q Wealth tax Act, 1957 and Article 133 1 c of the Constitution of India.
In the companyrse of its companysolidated order rejecting the appeals, the appellate Tribunal observed that although section 21 of the Special Marriage Act pre served some of the rights in the family property of the children born out of marriage solemnized under that Act, it did number clothe such off spring with the character of Hindus and therefore, there was numberHindu undivided family of Sridharan and his son which companyld claim to be taxed as Hindu undivided family.
The orders passed by the Income Tax Wealth Tax Expenditure Tax officers and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner were also affirmed in appeals against the assessments respectively made under the Income tax Act, Wealth Tax Act and the Expenditure Tax Act by the Appellate Tribunal.
The Income Tax officer, Wealth Tax officer and Expenditure Tax officer refused to accede to the companytention of Sridharan and assessed him in the status of an individual as in the previous years on the grounds that the value of the share and other investments standing in his name being his exclusive properties and by virtue of section 21 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, succession to the property of a person whose marriage has been solemnized under that Act being governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and number by the ordinary Hindu law, Nicolas Sundaram companyld number become a member of Hindu undivided family with his father.
As a result of this partition, a block of shares in V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Private Limited and three other limited companypanies fell to his share.
On November 29, 1957, a son named Nicolas Sundaram was born out of this wedlock.
This is how the appeals are before us.
In the assessment proceedings in respect of income tax and wealth tax for the assessment years 1959 60, 1960 61 and 1961 62 and in the assessment proceedings under the Expenditure Tax Act for the year 1961 62, he claimed to be assessed in the status of a member of Hindu undivided family companysisting of himself and his son, Nicolas Sundaram, companytending that the property held by him was ancestral and Nicolas Sundaram was a Hindu.
328 of 1966 Reference No.
82 of 1964 and Civil Appeal No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
314/64 Reference No.
A further appeal was Whether the assessee, Sridharan and his son companystituted A in law a Hindu undivided family for the purpose of assessment under the Wealth tax Act, 1957 ?
A few days after the valuation date relevant for the assessment year 1963 64, his widow Mrs. Rosa Maria Steinbchler filed a wealth tax return claiming that the assessment for the assessment year 1962 63 should be made in the status of Hindu undivided family.
1399 to 1403 of 1970.
On June 14, 1956, Sridharan married Rosa Maria Steinbchler, a Christian woman of Austrian descent, under the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
1399 to 1403 of 1970 and 301 of 1974 by certificates granted by the High Court of Madras shall be disposed of together by this judgment as they raise companymon question of law and fact.
Sridharan thereupon went up in appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner but remained unsuccessful.
88/66 .
For the assessment years 1957 58, and 1958 59, Sridharan was assessed to income tax and wealth tax in the status of an individual on his own declaration to that effect.
The circumstances giving rise to these appeals are The late R. Sridharan along with his father and brothers companystituted a Hindu undivided family governed by Mitakshara law.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by JASWANT SINGH, J. These Appeals Nos.
On June 28, 1952, while he was still unmarried, a partition took place between him, his brothers and his father.
T. Desai, J. Ramamurthi for the appellant In CA 1399 1403 of 1970 .
Swaminathan, Mrs. S. Gopalakrishnan for the Respondent in all the appeals.
