9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Whether the sum of Rs. 60,000 gifted by the assessee to his sons is includible in the estate of the deceased as property deemed to pass on his death under section 10 of Estate Duty Act, 1953? Analysis: The deceased gifted Rs. 60,000 to his sons and admitted them as partners in his business. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty contended that the deceased did not entirely exclude himself from the benefits of the gifted amount, as the firm derived benefits from it. The Judicial Appellate Controller held that by admitting his sons without any premium, the deceased surrendered his rights to enjoy the profits. The Tribunal, however, found the gifts to be absolute and made by the sons for their own benefit, not the deceased's. The Tribunal's decision was based on the requirement that the donee must assume possession and enjoyment of the property to the exclusion of the donor, which was satisfied in this case. The applicability of section 10 of the Estate Duty Act requires the donee to assume possession and enjoyment of the gifted property to the exclusion of the donor. The Tribunal found that the sons assumed possession over the gifted amount and derived profits for their own benefit, excluding the deceased. The Tribunal's decision aligned with the legal principle that the possession and enjoyment of the gift must be retained by the donee to the exclusion of the donor. The Supreme Court's decision in a similar case emphasized the importance of the donee's exclusion of the donor from the gifted property, which was met in this scenario. The Tribunal's decision was based on the factual findings that the sons assumed possession and enjoyment of the gifted amount for their own benefit, excluding the deceased. The legal requirement that the donee must exclude the donor from the possession and enjoyment of the gift was fulfilled in this case. Therefore, the Tribunal's decision was upheld, ruling that the sum of Rs. 60,000 gifted by the assessee to his sons is not includible in the estate of the deceased. The assessee was awarded costs of Rs. 200, and the reference was answered in the negative, favoring the assessee and against the department.
|
