Inheritance of property under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, results in the property becoming the individual property of the heir and not that of the Hindu undivided family.

( 1 ) THE Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under Section 256 (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), for the opinion to this court :

"whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the income from property and agricultural land belonged to the assessee in his individual status and not in the status of a Hindu undivided family ?"

( 2 ) THE reference relates to the assessment years 1977-78, 1978-79, 1979-80, 1980-81, 1984-85 and 1985-86.

( 3 ) BRIEFLY stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :

( 4 ) THE applicant is an individual who derives income from medical profession. In respect of the assessment years 1977-78 to 1980-81 original assessment has been completed bringing to tax only the professional income of the applicant. The assessments were subsequently reopened under Section 147 of the Act on the ground that there was escapement of income due to the assessees failure to disclose income from agricultural land and income from house property which was used by the assessee for his residential purpose and also on the ground that on the basis of the material seized at the time of the search of the assessees premises on February 6, 1985, it became apparent that actual income from medical profession was much more than what has been disclosed by the assessee and which had been adopted in the original assessment. In the course of the reassessment the applicant submitted that it was not correct to say that he has not disclosed income from agricultural land and from house property in the original return. According to him he had given a note on the statement annexed to the original return for the assessment year 1977-78 stating that the agricultural land belonged to the Hindu undivided family. Similar was the position in regard to the house in which he was residing. According to him, when he had given the aforesaid note, he could not be accused of having not disclosed the basic facts necessary for his assessment and as such the condition precedent for taking action under Section 147 (a) of the Act was not fulfilled. The plea of the applicant that the agricultural land and the self-occupied property belonged to the Hindu undivided family of the assessee was, however, rejected by the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals ). The note given by the applicant in the return for the assessment year 1977-78, only made the following mention : "agricultural grove is Hindu undivided family property. Hence not returned. "

( 5 ) THERE was no mention in it of the property in which the applicant was residing. On the merits also, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has held that both the aforesaid properties belonged to the applicant as an individual and that they were not his Hindu undivided family properties. Accordingly, he added the income from agriculture and from self-occupied property in the rental income of the assesses for the assessment years under consideration.

( 6 ) IN respect of the assessment years 1984-85 and 1985-86 the above view was repeated by the income-tax Officer and additions were accordingly made in the course of the assessment which were confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals ). The Commissioner of income-tax (Appeals) had further observed that the admitted position is that the property was constructed by his late father and it was his (fathers) self-acquired property who had three sons including the applicant, who inherited in equal shares after his death as well as the death of their mother. While holding so, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had relied upon a decision of this court in the case of CWT v. Chander Sen [1974] 96 ITR 634. The Commissioner of income-tax (Appeals) has also rejected the plea raised by the applicant that he has blended his separate properties w