9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (8) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e items of properties mentioned in the gift deeds were already in possession of Kudiyans as would be clear from the narration in the gift-deeds themselves and also in the schedules to the gift deeds ; that some items of properties were already in the possession of the three donees, gifts having been made orally in 1954 and, therefore, these items are to be excluded from the value of the gift. It was also contended that the gift deed disclosed the true value of the lands which were transferred. The learned Gift-tax Officer excluded the value of the lands that were in the possession of the Kudiyans but did not agree with the assessee's contention that certain properties were already gifted orally by the donor long before coming into force of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rty Act and submitted that the oral gifts made by a Mohamedan do not require registration. The very fact that the document executed in 1957 had in its recital the factum of oral gifts having been made and possession handed over to the donees in respect of certain properties as early as in 1954 would constitute prima facie evidence of the completed gift in respect of those properties made long before the coming into force of the G.T. Act. Therefore, the inclusion of such properties for the purpose of levy of gift-tax in the assessment year 1958-59 was unjustified. It was his further submission that even if the properties orally gifted in 1954 were to be included as gifts made during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1958-59, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... --------------------------------- K. Avukoya Naha 53.69 K. Beepathumma 29.55 K. Mohammed Naha 103.21 -------- 186.45 -------- The assessee's contention is that inasmuch as 186.45 acres had been gifted orally in 1954 and the donees had been put in possession and enjoyment of the same there cannot be a gift of the same properties to the same donees by the same donor in 1957. The recitals in the documents relating to the previous gifts would constitute prima facie evidence that in respect of those properties hiba or oral gift was complete as early as in 1954 and hence the value of those properties should not have been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n be said that delivery of possession had taken place and the recital in the deed of gift to that effect is binding on the donor and the donee as it has been specifically mentioned in all the documents registered in the year 1957 that certain properties which were orally gifted in 1954 were in possession and enjoyment of the donees. Thus, we reject the argument of the revenue that there was no evidence to show that possession was obtained long before the execution of the gift deeds. 5. Shri Valsan for the assessees vehemently argued that in view of the provisions of section 129 of the Transfer of Property Act, there was no need under the Mahomedan Law to have the gifts of immovable property of the value exceeding Rs. 100 registered throug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 129 if that provision is read down to vindicate a reasonable classification. The Transfer of Property Act is a pre-constitution statute and the expression 'gift' in Section 129 may, perhaps, save all manner of gifts made prior to the Constitution, the truncated meaning for the word 'gift' being assigned only because of Articles 14 and 15(1)." As the import of Section 129 of the Transfer of Property Act was laid down by the jurisdictional High Court to cover only cases of pious or religious gifts, made by persons belonging to Islam faith but not secular gifts, we have to hold that the secular gifts, in order to be valid, require registration under the provisions of Section 17 of the Registration Act. This was not done in respect of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
