Where an amount stood in the name of the assessee's wife, the onus of proof was not on the assessee but was on the Income-tax Department to show by, at least, same materials that the amount did not belong to the assessee's wife but to the assessee himself.
Kamla Sahai, J.
1. In this case, the assesses is a Hindu undivided family consisting of M. L. Rungta (Mangilal Rungta) and his sons. Three of those sons are M. G. Rungta (Madan Gopal Rungta), B. N. Rungta) (Biswanath Rungta) and S. R. Rungta (Sitaram Rungta). The questions which arise for decision in this case relate to the income from Jugasalai Electric Supply. Co. The assessee's case is that shares are held in the Electric Supply Co. as follows:
M.L. Rungta (as representing the Hindu undivided family) .... as. -/4/- M. G. Rungta .... -/4/- B. N. Rungta .... -/4/- S. R. 'Rungta .... -/2/- An Outsider .... as. -/2/-
2. The assessment years in question are 1945-46, 1946-47, 1947-48 and 1948-49. But the assessment in respect of each of the assessment years does not have to be separately considered because the point involved is the same. The Income-tax Officer held that the shares allotted to M. G. Rungta, B. N. Rungta and S. R. Rungta in the Jugasalai Electric Supply Co. were all held by the Hindu undivided family in their names, as the funds said to have been contributed by these coparceners of the family to the Electric Supply Co. were the funds of the Hindu undivided family. The assessee took an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax in respect of each of the assessment years but the appeals failed. The assessee then took a further appeal in respect of each of the assessment years to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and the Tribunal, by its order dated 3-7-1952, held that the share standing in the name of Sitaram Rungta was held by him in his individual capacity. It, however, dismissed the appeals in respect of the shares held in the names of M. G. Rungta and B. N. Rungta.
Print Page
Mangilal Rungta vs Commr. Of Income-Tax on 4 March, 1955
Equivalent citations: AIR 1955 Pat 366, 1955 (3) BLJR 263
Bench: Ramaswami, K Sahai
JUDGMENTKamla Sahai, J.
1. In this case, the assesses is a Hindu undivided family consisting of M. L. Rungta (Mangilal Rungta) and his sons. Three of those sons are M. G. Rungta (Madan Gopal Rungta), B. N. Rungta) (Biswanath Rungta) and S. R. Rungta (Sitaram Rungta). The questions which arise for decision in this case relate to the income from Jugasalai Electric Supply. Co. The assessee's case is that shares are held in the Electric Supply Co. as follows:
M.L. Rungta (as representing the Hindu undivided family) .... as. -/4/- M. G. Rungta .... -/4/- B. N. Rungta .... -/4/- S. R. 'Rungta .... -/2/- An Outsider .... as. -/2/-
2. The assessment years in question are 1945-46, 1946-47, 1947-48 and 1948-49. But the assessment in respect of each of the assessment years does not have to be separately considered because the point involved is the same. The Income-tax Officer held that the shares allotted to M. G. Rungta, B. N. Rungta and S. R. Rungta in the Jugasalai Electric Supply Co. were all held by the Hindu undivided family in their names, as the funds said to have been contributed by these coparceners of the family to the Electric Supply Co. were the funds of the Hindu undivided family. The assessee took an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax in respect of each of the assessment years but the appeals failed. The assessee then took a further appeal in respect of each of the assessment years to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and the Tribunal, by its order dated 3-7-1952, held that the share standing in the name of Sitaram Rungta was held by him in his individual capacity. It, however, dismissed the appeals in respect of the shares held in the names of M. G. Rungta and B. N. Rungta.
