| COURT: | |
| CORAM: | |
| SECTION(S): | |
| GENRE: | |
| CATCH WORDS: | |
| COUNSEL: | |
| DATE: | (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | June 29, 2011 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | |
| FILE: | |
| CITATION: | |
| Click here to download the judgement (bhalodia_HUF_gifts.pdf) |
HUF is a “relative” for gifts exemption u/s 56(2)(v), (vi) & (vii)
The assessee received a gift of Rs.60 lakhs from his HUF. The AO & CIT(A) held that as HUF was not covered by the definition of “relative”, the gift was chargeable to tax u/s 56(2)(v). The alternate submission that gift was exempt u/s 10(2) was rejected on the basis that s. 10(2) applied only to amounts received “out of income of the estate” on partial or total partition of the HUF. On appeal by the assessee, HELD allowing the appeal:
(i) S. 56(2)(v) exempts gifts from a “relative”. Though the definition of the term “relative” does not specifically include a Hindu Undivided Family, a ‘HUF” constitutes all persons lineally descended from a common ancestor and includes their mothers, wives or widows and unmarried daughters. As all these persons fall in the definition of “relative”, an HUF is ‘a group of relatives’. As a gift from a “relative” is exempt, a gift from a ‘group of relatives’ is also exempt since the singular will include the plural;
(ii) The gift was also exempt u/s 10(2) because the two conditions required to be satisfied for relief viz (1) that the assessee is a member of the HUF and (2) that he receives the sum out of the income of such HUF (may be of an earlier Year) were satisfied.
Wat a decision.. the court should have considered the following.. althogh there may be several membere in huf.. but not all have equal power. The wife of any son is not co parcenor…
However..she is relative in terms of 56 (2) vii.. therefore as such where the HUF has specifically not been included in meaning of relative under 56 (2) vii, the same shall not be deemed out of the box..