COMMR. OF WEALTH TAX, MADRAS & ORS. vs. LATE R. SRIDHARAN BY L.RS.

CIVIL APPEAL No. 1399/1970Supreme Court1976 INSC 13129 April 1976Bench: 5 JudgesAuthor: A.N. RAY, M. HAMEEDULLAH BEG, R.S. SARKARIA, P.N. SHINGAL, JASWANT SINGH8 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

The assessee, R. Sridharan, a Hindu, married Rosa Maria Steinbichler, a Christian, under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. A son, Nicolas Sundaram, was born from this union. For assessment years 1959-60 to 1961-62, Sridharan claimed to be assessed as a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) consisting of himself and his son, arguing his son was Hindu and the property was ancestral. The revenue authorities rejected this, assessing him as an 'individual' on the grounds that succession was governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925, not Hindu Law, and thus the son could not be part of an HUF. These orders were upheld by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Appellate Tribunal. The High Court, on reference, ruled in favour of Sridharan. After Sridharan's death, his widow also claimed HUF status, which was again rejected by the revenue. The matter was again referred to the High Court, which ruled in favour of the widow, granting leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.

What did the Supreme Court hold?

The Supreme Court held that Nicolas Sundaram is a Hindu and can validly be a member of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) headed by his father. The Court reasoned that under the codifying Hindu Acts (Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; Hindu Succession Act, 1956; Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956), the definition of 'Hindu' has been extended. Any child, legitimate or illegitimate, where one parent is a Hindu by religion and the child is brought up as a Hindu, is considered a Hindu. The judgment noted that Sridharan was Hindu by birth, continued to profess Hinduism, and there was no material to show Nicolas Sundaram was not brought up as a Hindu or recognized as such. The Court also found that Section 21 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, which governs succession, does not impair or alter the joint family structure between an assessee and his son, nor does it affect the discretion of a Hindu assessee to treat his properties as joint family properties by including his Hindu sons. The appeals were dismissed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether Nicolas Sundaram, the legitimate son of a Hindu father and a Christian mother, married under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, is a Hindu for the purposes of constituting a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) for assessment under the Income-tax, Wealth-tax, and Expenditure-tax Acts? (Question of law and fact, concerning the definition of 'Hindu' and the applicability of Hindu Law). Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that Nicolas Sundaram, being brought up as a Hindu, should be considered a Hindu and thus could form an HUF with his father. They relied on the extended definition of 'Hindu' under codifying Hindu laws and the principle that a child generally takes the father's religion. Revenue's contentions: The revenue contended that succession to the property of a person married under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, is governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925, not ordinary Hindu Law. Therefore, Nicolas Sundaram could not become a member of an HUF with his father, and Section 21 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, precluded the formation of an HUF. They relied on the specific provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 21

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

478 A COMMR. OF WEALTH TAX, MADRAS & ORS. v. LATE R. SRIDHARAN BY L.Rs.

April 29. 1976 ,B . [A. N. RAY. C.J .• 1\1. H. BEG, R. s. SARKARlA, P. N. SIIJSGAL Atf[) JASWANT SINGH, JJ.l ~D ,E :F ~G Special 11.14rr1ag6.A.ct, 1954, Sec. 21-.Marriage betweell llindu assesue !I."'cl Cl1ristian female-Whether issue is a Hindu governed by Hindu Law . . The late' R. Sridharan married Rosa Maria. Steinbichler, a christi:tn of Austrian descent. under the Special M:.rriage Act. 1954 and a son Nicolu Sundaram was born out of the . wedlock. In the assessment proceedin.gs in respect of income tax, wealth ta:t and expenditure tax. Sridharan claimed t<> be assessed in the status of a member of Hindu Undivided F;unily consisting of himself and his son, contending that n.c prop<:rty held by him wa.~ ancestral and Nicolas Sundaram was a Hindu. The officers dealing with these taxes rejected the contention and assessed him as :m "individual" on the ground that succession to the property of a person married under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, is governed by the Indian Succession. Act, 1925 and not by ordin:u-y Hindu Law and Nicolas Sundaram could not become a member of Hindu Undiv

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 21

All 35 judgments and leading authorities on Section 21 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →