THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BIHAR-II, RANCHI versus SMT. SANDHYARANI DUTIA

Citation: [2001] 2 S.C.R. 64 · Decided: 22-02-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.P. BHARUCHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BIHAR-II, RANCHI 
v. 
j. 
SMT. SANDHYARANI DUTIA 
FEBRUARY 22, 2001 
B 
[S.P. BHARUCHA, N. SANTOSH HEGDE AND 
Y.K. SABHARWAL, JJ.] 
Income Tax: 
~ 
c 
Income Tax Act, 1961-Hindu Undivided Family-Constitution by 
female members through agreement-Held, the constitution of Hindu Undi-
vided Family by Hindu females through an agreement is contrary to basic tenet 
of Hindu pei:wnal law, which requires at/east one male member for the 
fo1mation. 
D 
A Hindu male governed by Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law, died 
intestate leaving behind his widow (respondent-assessee) and two daugh· 
ters. They formed an Hindu Undivided Family (H. U .F.) by entering into an 
agreement. The assessee threw her share of inherited property into the 
kitty of H.U.F. and did not disclose income from her share of the inherited 
property for the assessment years 1974-75 and 1975-76. The I.T.O. 
-
E 
assessed the income from her 3hare of inherited property to tax rejecting 
-.( 
the formation of H.U.F. by female members. The Appellate Assistant Com· 
missioner rejected the appeal of the assessee. Tribunal allowed the appeal. 
High Court dismissed the reference made at the instance of the Revenue 
under the Income Tax, Act, 1961. Hence the appeals by the Revenue. 
F 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. The capacity of Hindu females to form among them· 
selves an H.U.F. appears to be alien to the Hindu personal law which 
requires the presence of a male for the purposes of the constitution of an 
G 
H. U .F. The concept of Hindu females forming a joint Hindu Family by 
agreement amongst themselves appears to us to be contrary to a basic 
tenet of the Hindu personal law. Atleast one male member is necessary for 
the purposes of the formation of an H.U.F. [68-B; 67-C] 
-r 
1.2. Consequently, the female heirs cannot treat the inherited prop· 
H 
erty as joint family property. [67-E] 
64 
f. 
C.l.T. v. SMT. S.R. DUTTA [BHARUCHA, J.] 
65 
1.3. The share of properties inherited by the assessee from her 
A 
husband is assessable in her hands in the status of indhidual under the 
Income Tax Act, 1961. [66·A] 
Gowli Buddanna v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mysore, 60 ITR 293; 
Surjit Lal Chhabda v. Commissioner of Income Tax, 101 ITR 776 and Pushpa 
Devi v. Commissioner of Income-tax, 109 ITR 730, relied on. 
Commissioner of Wealth Tax v. Gauri Shankar Bhar, 84 ITR 699, 
distinguished. 
Commissioner of Wealth Tax v. Gouri Shankar Bhar, 68 ITR 345; 
Commissioner of Income-tax v. Sanvan Kumar, 13 ITR 361 and Commis-
sioner of Income-tax, Madras v. Veorappa Chottiar, 76 ITR 467, referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 5450-5451 
of 1997. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 9.8.95 of the Patna High Court in 
T.C. Nos. 70 and 71 of 1980. 
M.L. Verma, Rajiv Tayagi, (B.V.B. Das) for Sushma Suri for the Ap-
pellant. 
B. Sen, (A.C.), Prakash Shrivastava and Ms. Pradipti Shrivastava for 
the Respondent. 
The Judgment of tl1e Court was delivered by 
BHAR~CHA, J. These appeals arise from a judgment delivered by the 
High Court at Patna (Ranchi Bench) on an income tax reference at the 
instance of the Revenue. The three questions the High Court was called upon 
to consider read thns: 
"(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, female 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
heirs of a Hindn governed by the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law 
G 
dying intestate could form a joint Hindu Family by means of agree-
ment? 
(ii) Whether female heirs of a Hindu governed by the Dayabhaga 
School of Hindu Law dying intestate could impress up0n their inher-
ited property the character of joint family property ? 
H 
A 
B 
66 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] 2 S.C.R. 
(iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, one-
third of the properties inherited from her husband was assessable in 
the hands of the assessee in the status of individual?" 
The High Court answered the first and second questions in the affinnative and 
in favour of the assessee and the third question in the negative and against 
the Revenue. 
The brief facts leading to the reference are these: One Har Govind 
Dutta, a Hindu governed by the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law, died 
intestate on 19th June, 1972, leaving behind his widow (the assessee- respond-
C 
ent) and two daughters, Priya Dutta and Keya Dutta. That the assessee and 
the two daughters inherited the self-acquired properties of the deceased in 
equal shares is not in cli;pute. The asses

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.