CLUBBING PROVISIONS RELATING TO SPOUSE AND MINOR CHILD UNDER THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961

Introduction

In the domain of Indian income-tax law, the concept of clubbing of income is a targeted anti-tax avoidance mechanism. Among its various applications, income arising from asset transfers to spouse and income accruing to minor children occupy a central position due to the frequency and ease with which such relationships can be used to redirect taxable income. To counteract such tax planning strategies, Section 64(1)(iv), Section 64(1)(vii) and Section 64(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, mandate that certain incomes, though legally accruing to another person, must be deemed as income of the transferor (i.e., the assessee) for tax purposes.

Section 64(1)(iv) provides that where an individual transfers an asset (other than house property governed by Section 27(i)) to his or her spouse, without adequate consideration and not in connection with an agreement to live apart, the income from such an asset shall be included in the total income of the transferor. Further, Section 64(1)(vii) extends this clubbing principle to transfers made not directly to the spouse but to another person or an association of persons, for the immediate or deferred benefit of the spouse, again without adequate consideration.

Additionally, Section 64(1A) governs the clubbing of income earned by a minor child. The provision directs that such income shall be included in the total income of the parent whose total income (before clubbing) is greater, except where the minor earns income by way of manual work, skill, talent, specialized knowledge, or suffers from a disability defined under Section 80U. The law further provides an exemption of ₹1,500 per child under Section 10(32) when such income is clubbed.

Together, these provisions prevent the artificial shifting of income by holding the transferor or higher-earning parent liable for taxation. The law aims to ensure equity and eliminate misuse of dependent or spousal relationships for tax evasion. Their application depends upon various factual considerations such as the adequacy of consideration, the nature of the relationship, and the timing of the transfer and income accrual. The following sections elaborate on the operation, illustrations, and implications of these critical clubbing rules.

Clubbing of Income from Assets Transferred to Spouse [Section 64(1)(iv)]

A. Statutory Provision

Section 64(1)(iv) provides that in computing the total income of an individual, income arising (directly or indirectly) from the transfer of an asset to their spouse, without adequate consideration and not under an agreement to live apart, shall be included in the total income of the transferor.

B. Key Conditions for Applicability

1. Existence of Marital Relationship
   The relationship of husband and wife must exist both:
   • At the time of transfer of the asset, and
   • At the time of accrual of income.

If the transfer is made before marriage, or if the marriage ends before income accrues, the clubbing provision will not apply.

2. No Adequate Consideration
   Consideration must be real, monetary, and measurable. Natural love, affection, or moral obligation is not regarded as adequate.
3. Direct or Indirect Transfer
   The provision applies even if the income is routed through reinvestments or transformations of the original asset.
4. Not Under Agreement to Live Apart
   Transfers during judicial separation or under mutual legal separation agreements are excluded.

C. Illustrations

Full Clubbing
Mr. A gifts ₹5,00,000 in debentures to his wife without any consideration. She earns interest income of ₹50,000 annually. Entire ₹50,000 will be clubbed in Mr. A’s income.

Partial Clubbing (Formula Applied)
If Mr. A transfers debentures worth ₹1,00,000 to his wife for ₹25,000 (inadequate consideration), and she earns ₹10,000 interest, the clubbable income is:

Clubbable Income = ₹10,000 × (₹75,000 / ₹1,00,000) = ₹7,500

Balance ₹2,500 will be taxed in the wife’s hands.

Clubbing Where Asset Is Transferred to Another for Spouse’s Benefit [Section 64(1)(vii)]

A. Statutory Provision

Section 64(1)(vii) states that if an asset is transferred to any person or an Association of Persons (AOP), otherwise than for adequate consideration, for the immediate or deferred benefit of the spouse of the individual, the income arising from such transferred asset shall be included in the total income of the transferor to the extent of such benefit.

B. Illustrations and Application

Example: Mr. X transfers shares worth ₹10,00,000 to a trust created for the benefit of his wife. The trust earns ₹80,000 in dividend income. Entire ₹80,000 will be clubbed in Mr. X’s income.

     C. Judicial Interpretation

In CIT v. Prem Bhai Parekh, it was held that mere payment of income to a spouse from a trust does not by itself invoke clubbing unless the transferor was the person who created the trust for the spouse’s benefit. Therefore, beneficial ownership and causal connection with the transferor are necessary.

Other Important Doctrines Under Section 64(1)(iv) & (vii)

A. Transformation of Asset

Income from the transformed form of the asset is still clubbed. For instance, if gifted shares are sold and the proceeds are used to purchase a house property, rental income from that house will be clubbed.

B. Income on Income Not Clubbed

When income is earned from reinvested income, it is not clubbed.

Example: Mr. Y gifts shares to Mrs. Y. She earns ₹1,00,000 dividend, which she uses to buy debentures. Interest from debentures is not clubbed, as it arises from income on income.

     C. Bonus Shares Not Clubbed

Income from bonus shares received by the transferee on gifted shares is not clubbed.

Example: Mr. X gifts shares of XYZ Ltd. to Mrs. X. She receives bonus shares and earns dividends on them. Dividend on original shares is clubbed, but not on bonus shares.

Income of Minor Child [Section 64(1A)]

A. Statutory Framework

Section 64(1A) states that all income accruing or arising to a minor child shall be included in the income of that parent whose total income (before clubbing) is higher. This provision overrides all other sections for income of minor children.

B. Exceptions

No clubbing occurs if:

1. Income is earned through manual work,
2. Income is due to the child’s skill, talent, specialized knowledge, or experience,
3. The child suffers from a disability specified under Section 80U.

C. Clubbing Mechanism

• If marriage subsists, income is clubbed in the hands of the higher-earning parent.
• If marriage does not subsist, it is clubbed in the hands of the parent who maintains the child.
• If both parents are deceased, income is not clubbed with the guardian’s income.

D. Exemption Under Section 10(32)

An amount of ₹1,500 per minor child is deductible from the clubbed income or the income of the child, whichever is less.

E. Illustrations

Income from Skill
A 16-year-old child earns ₹1,00,000 as a chess coach. Income is not clubbed, as it is earned through specialized skill.

Passive Income
A 12-year-old child earns ₹40,000 interest from fixed deposits gifted by parents. Income is clubbed with higher-earning parent’s income after giving exemption of ₹1,500.

Disabled Minor
If the child has 55% blindness (certified), income from any source will not be clubbed under Section 64(1A).

Case Law:

In R.P. Sarathy v. Joint CIT, the court held that if both parents are not alive, the guardian cannot be taxed for the minor’s income under Section 64(1A).

Conclusion

The provisions of Section 64(1)(iv), Section 64(1)(vii), and Section 64(1A) form the backbone of India’s clubbing mechanism in personal tax law, especially for family-based income redirection. Their significance lies not merely in preventing tax avoidance, but also in defining the limits of lawful tax planning when dealing with close family relationships. By deeming certain incomes as taxable in the hands of the transferor or parent, these sections close the door to artificial income fragmentation that would otherwise distort the progressive nature of income taxation.

Section 64(1)(iv) ensures that any income from an asset transferred to a spouse without adequate and quantifiable consideration is brought back into the hands of the person who originally owned the asset. This applies regardless of whether the income is reinvested or transformed into another form (e.g., if a spouse buys a house from the transferred asset and earns rental income). The law, however, makes exceptions in cases such as transfers made before marriage or where the spouses are living apart under a written agreement. Likewise, Section 64(1)(vii) applies a similar treatment where assets are transferred to a third party but ultimately for the benefit of the spouse.

A common judicial interpretation, as seen in CIT v. J.H. Gotla [(1985) 156 ITR 323 (SC)], clarifies that “natural love and affection” cannot be treated as adequate consideration, and hence income from such transfers is rightly taxable in the transferor’s hands. Proportional clubbing is also applied when the asset is transferred at inadequate consideration, using the formula: Clubbable Income = Total Income × (Inadequate Portion / Fair Market Value of Asset)

In parallel, Section 64(1A) targets income earned by minor children, except in specific exclusions. It seeks to club such income in the hands of the higher-earning parent, thereby ensuring fairness in taxation. However, income derived from the minor’s own labour, skill, talent, or special knowledge, or if the child suffers from a disability under Section 80U, is exempted from clubbing. Courts have also affirmed that if both parents are deceased, the minor’s income cannot be clubbed with the guardian’s income.

In essence, these provisions are not mere procedural rules but are fundamental safeguards of the integrity of the tax system. They ensure that individuals do not misuse relational proximity for income splitting or unjust tax savings. Taxpayers must exercise due diligence in such asset transfers and declarations of minor income to stay compliant and avoid legal consequences. Awareness of these rules is essential for informed tax planning and fair contribution to public finance.