9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (8) TMI 134X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld that the daughter was born in 1980 and there was no hurry to make any gift. Further there was no need to allocate separate funds for the minor daughter's maintenance and education. Thus, he disallowed the exemption claimed and taxed the same. On appeal, the AAC held that under section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, a Hindu father had an obligation to maintain his daughter. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is children to the extent it is reasonable is exempt under section 5(1)(xii) of the Act. Admittedly, the assessee is a rich man. Thus, in our view the gift of Rs. 50,000 made by the assessee to his minor daughter is reasonable and cannot be considered as excessive. It is exempt under section 5(1)(xii). 4. In CGT v. Ch. Chandrasekhara Reddy [1976] 105 ITR 849 (AP), out of 27 acres, the assessee g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aw the joint family estate is liable for marriage and maintenance expenses of the unmarried daughter and the sum of Rs. 50,000 claimed as deduction for marriage expenses of the daughter of the deceased was perfectly justified. On those findings the revenue sought a reference to the High Court which was rejected by the Tribunal as well as by the Andhra Pradesh High Court. 5. The ratio laid down i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
