The Hindu Succession Act, 1956, has changed the law on the subject of Hindu undivided families and introduced radical reform in the Mitakshara law of joint family property. A Hindu widow who becomes the full owner of her deceased husband's properties under Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, cannot be considered to be a Hindu undivided family for the purpose of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957.

Judgement

NARASIMHAM, C.J. :- These two references were made by the Appellate Tribunal under Section 27 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, and the question for the opinion of this Court has been formulated as follows :

"Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the status of the assessee has been rightly determined as that of an individual in the assessment to Wealth tax - for the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-1959."

2. The following genealogical tree of the asssessees family will be useful.

The parties are Hindus governed by the Mitakahara.

3. On 18-10-44 the assessees husband effected partition with his father and was allotted a share of the assets belonging to the family. Thereafter, Jaisingh managed the business of his own family consisting of himself his wife Rukmani (assessee) and their minor unmarried daughter Hemalata till his death on 14-8-1949. Jaisingh was assessed as an individual by the Income-tax authorities. After his death, his widow (assessee) was also assessed as an individual in the Income-tax proceedings since 1952-53. When the Wealth Tax Act was brought into force on 1-4-1957, the assessee contended that she must be assessed as a Hindu Undivided Family and not as an individual. This contention was rejected by the Wealth Tax Authorities and for the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59 she was assessed as an individual.

4. Though it is not expressly admitted, it may be taken as unchallenged that the properties which Jaisingh got by partition were ancestral properties in his hands even though he was the sole coparcener as he had no son. After his death in 1949 his widow (assessee) came into full possession of his properties as widows estate and has been in possession since then subject of course to the right of her minor unmarried daugher, Hemlata to maintenance. Hence, by virtue of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, the arsessee became the full owner of the property though her minor, unmarried daughters right of maintenance has been amply safeguarded by the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act 1956.

5. The sole question of law that arises for decision now is - whether a Hindu Widow and her minor unmarried daughter should be considered to be a Hindu Undivided family for the purpose of the Wealth Tax Act - even though the properties of the family were originally possessed by the widow as widows estate but of which after the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, she became a full owner. This question of law may be discussed under the following two heads :

(i) Did the widow and her minor unmarried daughter constitute a Hindu Undivided Family prior to the coming into the force of the Hindu Succession Act ?

(ii) Did Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act have the effect of altering the status of the widow to that of an individual for the purpose of taxation laws ?

6. The expression Hindu Undivided Family is a familiar one in the Indian Income-tax Act - See S. 2(9) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. There are several decisions of the Privy Council and of the High Courts dealing with the construction of that expression. The same expression occurs in the Indian Income-tax Act, 1961 - see Section 2(31)(i). The same expression was also used in the Excess Profits Tax Act and it occurs in the Orissa Agricultural Income-tax Act also. It has been reproduced in the series of taxation laws enacted in 1957 and 1958, namely, the Wealth Tax Act, the Expenditure Tax Act and the Gift Tax Act.

7. One of the contentions raised by Mr. Sidhartha Roy for the assesses was that the expression Hindu Undivided Family need not have the same meaning in the Indian Income-tax Act and the Wealth Tax Act inasmuch as the disposing power of the manager of a Hindu undivided family over income out of joint family properties is not the same as his power over the corpus of the joint family properties. In my opinion, this attempt to make a distinction between the meaning to be given to the aforesaid expression in the