A Hindu undivided family (HUF) can consist of a father and his unmarried daughter, and the income from property received by a coparcener on partition of joint family property can be treated as belonging to a HUF consisting of the coparcener, his wife, and minor daughters.

JUDGMENT :

S. B. Majmudar, J.

This reference at the instance of the Revenue poses for our consideration the following three questions :

"(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that, at the end of the partitions, dated December 28, 1964, December 29, 1967, March 26, 1971 and March 9, 1972, there survived a Hindu undivided family consisting of the assessee and his daughter?

(2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the movable and immovable properties that, as a result of the said partitions, fall to the share of the assessee constituted not his separate property but the joint property of the said Hindu undivided family?

(3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the income earned from the aforesaid properties during the year under consideration was taxable in the hands of the Hindu undivided family comprised of the assessee and his daughter?"

which have been referred to us by the Tribunal under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act.

2. A few relevant facts leading to this reference deserve to be noted at the outset. The concerned assessment year is 1972-73. The respondent assessee is an individual. The financial year is the previous year. His total income was assessed by the Income-tax Officer as per his order at Rs. 2,65,050 as rounded off as against the total income of Rs. 2,55,040 declared as per the original return dated August 29, 1972. The assessee later revised the return on June 6, 1974, and declared that whereas income amounting to Rs. 1,97,364 was taxable in his hands as an individual, the amount of Rs. 1,24,622 was taxable in his hands as karta of the Hindu undivided family which comprised by himself and his daughter. The total of the said two amounts maintained in the revised returns came to Rs. 3,21,986 as against the original total figure of Rs. 2,55,040. Regarding the amount of Rs. 1,24,622, the assessee claimed that the said income arose from assets which had fallen to his share on four partitions effected on December 28, 1964, December 29, 1967, March 26, 1971, and March 9, 1972. The said partitions of joint property belonging to the Hindu undivided family comprised of the assessee, his wife, his son and his daughter had taken place as between the assessee and his son's ?rd share had been allocated to the assessee, his wife and his son, respectively, at the time of each partition.

3. The Income-tax Officer took the view that whatever property the assessee received as a result of the partial partition would constitute his separate property and that his daughter, Aditi, would have no right therein.

4. The assessee went up in appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, following the principles laid down by the Supreme Court and various High Courts in the decisions referred to before him, held that the assessee was entitled to claim the status of a Hindu undivided family in respect of the properties received by him on partial partition and that the Income-tax Officer was not justified in including the income received by the appellant on partial partition in the individual income of the appellant-assessee.

5. The Revenue went up in appeal to the Tribunal against the said decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Tribunal noted, in the light of the four partition deeds, that the properties were divided among the assessee, his wife and his son and that the assessee's daughter, Aditi, was also a member of the Hindu undivided family. The Tribunal considered the question which was purely one of law and that question was as to whether income arising from the property falling to the share of the assessee as a result of the partitions, vide four separate deeds, was to be assessed as the assessee's individual income or the income of the Hindu undivided family made up of himself and his daughter. Having analysed the case-law cited before the Tri