1969 (9) TMI 19 - HC - Wealth-tax

Interest of the assessee in the trusts was claimed by the assessee as in the nature of annuity - whether the sums representing the capital value of the annual payments made to the assessee under the five trust deeds executed by him constituted part of the net wealth of the assessee - Held, no - assessee could claim exemption from including the capitalised value of these payments in his net wealth for the purpose of levying wealth-tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the sums representing the capital value of annual payments made to the assessee under the five trust deeds constituted part of the net wealth of the assessee.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Nature of Payments as Annuity:
The primary issue was whether the payments made to the assessee under five trust deeds constituted an "annuity" as per section 2(e)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The court examined the nature of the trust properties and the terms of the trust deeds. The properties were Government securities yielding fixed annual incomes. Despite the assessee's right to direct changes in investments, the court found that the payments received were fixed amounts and not variable, thus qualifying as annuities. The court relied on definitions from the Oxford Dictionary and Halsbury's Laws of England, which describe an annuity as a right to receive a definite or certain sum of money annually. The court distinguished this case from others where the right was to receive an aliquot share of the general income of trust properties, which would be variable and not a fixed sum.

2. Commutation of Annuity into Lump Sum:
The second issue was whether the terms and conditions of the trusts precluded the commutation of the annuity into a lump sum grant. The court noted that the trust deeds provided for the net income to be paid to the assessee for life, with provisions for the income or corpus to be transferred to his daughters and grandchildren after his death. There was no provision for the commutation of these payments into a lump sum. The court referred to section 174 of the Indian Succession Act, which applies to cases where a sum of money is provided for purchasing an annuity, allowing the annuitant to opt for a lump sum. However, in this case, the annuity was created directly from the income of the trust properties, without any provision for a lump sum payment. The court concluded that the terms and conditions of the trusts inherently precluded commutation into a lump sum.

Conclusion:
The court held that the payments received by the assessee under the five trust deeds were annuities as defined under section 2(e)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act and that the terms of the trusts precluded their commutation into a lump sum grant. Therefore, these payments were exempt from being included in the assessee's net wealth for wealth-tax purposes. The question referred was answered in the negative, favoring the assessee. The respondents were entitled to their costs, with the advocate's fee fixed at Rs. 250.