22 December 2022
We are a family of Mother and Two Brothers. My Father expired in 2016 leaving behind some property for us. This property is jointly held by mother, myself and my brother. I made two HUF in 2022 one for my father's family and one for my family. In both I am the karta. My queries are 1. My Father's family HUF has been named in name of my mother say my father name was X and mother name was Y. I have named HUF as Y (HUF) and PAN card has been obtained. Will there be any issue in keeping HUF name as that of Mother's? 2. Can rental income of my Father's property be shown as income of Y(HUF)? 3. After partition of Y(HUF), can rental income be shown in my HUF i.e say Z(HUF)? 4. Do I have to get those properties transferred in name of repective HUF to show rent as HUF income or will they be deemed as HUF income, despite them being in my Father's name?
23 December 2022
1. You have formed an HUF of your parents, after the death of your Father, which in itself is a disputable act. All other answers are based on the authenticity of the HUF....
27 December 2022
My understanding came from income tax department definition of HUF and ancestral property as defined by income tax. As per my understanding(Please correct me where I am wrong). As per income tax website, Income from ancestral property held by following families is taxable as income of HUF: a) A family of widow mother and sons (may be minor or major)
HUF is a continuous entity and I have just declared HUF as Mother_Name(HUF) to income tax department.
Also HUF income may be assessed if following two conditions are satisfied: There should be a coparcenership. In this connection, it is worthwhile to mention that once a joint family income is assessed as that of HUF, it continues to be assessed as such in subsequent assessment years till partition is claimed by coparceners. There should be a joint family property which consists of ancestral property, property acquired with the aid of ancestral property and property transferred by its members.
This condition is also satisfied in present case. Please elaborate where I might be wrong.