RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR, J.

The questions referred to this Court for determination under section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act are :

"1. Whether the proceedings under section 34 of the Act have validly been initiated and completed for the four assessment years in question ? 2. Whether the trust deeds are voidable or void and whether the assessee can be assessed in regard to the properties under section 9 of the Income-tax Act and for any period before the date of the judgement in O. S. No. 105 of 1949 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Madurai ?" *

The question raised by this reference in whether a Hindu undivided family, which is the assessee, was the owner of certain house property, so as to render it liable to be assessed on the income thereof under section 9 of the Income-tax Act. A subsidiary question that is raised is as regards the propriety or the legality of the reopening of the assessment under section 34 of the Act. The Hindu undivided family which is the assessee owned considerable properties which consisted among others of certain houses, the income from which is the subject-matter of the present dispute. Besides, it was carrying on a money lending business sharing the income from two firms in which it was a partner.

The family consisted of Sundara Rao and his minor sons. The father and manager Sundara Rao executed certain registered trust deeds settling certain of the houses for the benefit of some public charities appointing himself as the trustee-manager thereof. These deeds were four in number and were executed on 6th February, 1942, 13th July, 1944, 14th January, 1946, and 12th February, 1947. The kartha, as the trustee, assumed possession of the trust properties from the dates of the execution of the deeds. During the accounting years commencing from 1942 to 1946 the assessee, as the kartha of the family, brought to the notice of the Income-tax authorities the existence of these trust deeds and claimed that, as the properties had been set apart for charitable purposes, they had ceased to be the properties of the assessee and were therefore not subject to assessment to income-tax. As there was nothing ex facie the deeds to throw doubt on their validity, the Department accepted the contention of the assessee and excluded the income from these items in the computation of the assessable income of the family. While things were in this condition, one of the sons of Sundara Rao filed O. S. No. 105 of 1949 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Madurai, for a declalratlion that these settlement deeds executed by the Kartha Sundara Rao were null and void and impleaded thereto Sundara Rao and his other sons. It was admitted in the course of these proceedings that the properties, which were the subject of settlement, were ancestral properties belonging to the joint family. Sundara Rao defended the suit, however, on the ground that the deeds were executed bonafide in the expectation that the other members of the family would consent to the performance of the charities set our in each. The Subordinate Judge of Madurai decreed the suit on 4th November, 1949, holding that the deeds executed by the kartha (1st defendant) were null and void and not binding on the family properties, and that the plaint properties belonged to the joint family of the plaintiff and the defendants in that suit. When the Income-tax Officer was apprised of these proceedings and their result he took action under section 34 by a notice issued on 10th February, 1951. After hearing the objections of the assessee, he proceeded to complete the reassessment by giving effect to the judgement of the Sub-Court and included in the asssessable income of the family that attributable to the houses which were the subject-matter of the settlement deeds which had been set aside. Before the Income-tax Officer, besides disputing the legality of the action under section 34, the assessee contended that as the alienations affected by the kartha were only