9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (2) TMI 160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gifts chargeable to gift-tax (which were made keeping in view permanent heart disease of the appellant). 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. authorities below have completely ignored the specific mention in the so-called "MEMORANDUM OF GIFT" that the transfer of the amounts were meant for specific purposes of marriage of Miss Kalpana Goyal which were actually utilised on her marriage in 1986." 2. Assessee by status in this case is an individual and advocate by profession whose valuation date was31-3-1982. During the relevant accounting period the assessee transferred an amount of Rs. 10,000 to his daughter Kalpana Goyal vide cheque, dated6-4-1981and further amount of Rs. 7,000 on1-5-81again by cheque to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted facts and considering the fact that the gifts were made on 6-4-1981, 1-5-81 and 25-1-82 and the daughter of the assessee got married as last as on 13-2-86 and moreover the gifted amount was duly used by the daughter for the purpose of other than her marriage because she invested this money and earned income because of the amount received as gifts, as such it cannot be said that the present amount is in the nature of gift at the time of marriage of the daughter." 3. The action of the ld. GTO was contested by the assessee and before the ld. AAC of Gift-tax it appears to have been contended that Rs. 17,000 was transferred to a major unmarried daughter Kalpana Goyal for meeting her marriage expenses. It was explained that there was a clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant to his daughter is clearly a gift taxable under the provisions of G.T. Act, 1958. GTO was, therefore, justified in treating these transfers as gift. GTO's decision to treat these transfers as gifts is, therefore, confirmed." 4. Therefore the present appeal by the assessee before us is against that finding. On behalf of the assessee Shri Dharam Pal Bajaj, learned advocate besides repeating the submissions seen to have been made before the revenue authorities contended further that there was no taxable gift made u/s. 2(xii) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958. Mention was also made on sec. 5(1)(vii) of the Act in respect of the gift made for support and maintenance or on the occasion of the marriage of the relative. Mention by the learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ven by the father to his daughter for utilising the money with accretion at the time of her marriage. The assessee is a Hindu father. Under the Mayne's Hindu Law and other relevant provisions it is seen to be the assessee's social and legal obligation to support and maintain his children. Sec. 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act appears to be clear on the point wherein it is contained that "subject to the provision of this section Hindu is bound, during his or her lifetime to maintain his or her legitimate or illegitimate children and, his or her aged or infirm parents". From the above narration it is clear that the assessee, being a Hindu, was under a legal obligation to maintain his daughter. In terms of sec. 3(b)(ii) of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n terms of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act. In the light of the above discussion we are convinced that gift-tax was not leviable as the amount was meant for discharging assessee's legal obligation. For such conclusion we find full support from the ratio in the case of Bandi Subba Rao wherein the assessee executed partition deed giving land to his one married and one unmarried daughters. He had no son. Half of the property was settled on two daughters and such settlement was not found unreasonable. The said transaction was found neither an alienation nor a transfer attracting sec. 2(xii) of the Gift-tax Act. In fact the donor there was supposed to have discharged a pre-existing legal obligation. No gift-tax was found to be payable. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s involved in the whole process and thus the finding under challenge is required to be quashed. On behalf of the revenue the ratio in the case of Budur Thippaiah was mentioned and the ld. GTO also had relied upon the said ratio. The said ratio also could not be of any help to the revenue for the simple reason that the gift there is seen to have been made to the assessee's mother whereas in the case before us the transfer was in favour of the assessee's unmarried daughter. Moreover the ratio in the said case is not required to be followed as the same Hon'ble High Court in the subsequent judgment in the case of Bandi Subba Rao has pronounced a different ratio which we are following for deciding the present appeal. We, in fact, are following t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
