9911796707
TMI Blog1972 (12) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the Tribunal that the movable properties consisting of advances and investments are benami and that the assessee continued to be the beneficial owner of the same, there is no question of applying section 4(4) as there was in fact no transfer before the coming into force of the Act in relation to movable properties and the Tribunal is justified in not applying section 4(4) so far as the movable properties are concerned - Reference answered in the affirmative - - - - - Dated:- 6-12-1972 - Judge(s) : G. RAMANUJAM., V. RAMASWAMY. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by RAMANUJAM J.-One Appavoo Pillai, the assessee, was the proprietor of a bus service and a partner in the firm of M/s. Ratna Studio at Dharmapuri. He filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e had been purchased with the funds provided by the assessee and, therefore, those properties should also be included in the net wealth of the assessee. The order of the Wealth-tax Officer clubbing the properties standing in the name of the assessee's wife with those belonging to him was challenged by the assessee before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who, however, upheld the clubbing observing that the assessee had not, in fact, transferred the funds representing the value of the movable and the immovable properties in the name of his wife and that no gift has been established in respect of any of those properties. On appeal to the Tribunal, it held that so far as movable properties, i.e., advances and investments standing in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity of section 4(4) of the Wealth-tax Act with reference to movable properties standing in the name of the assessee's wife, while it applied that section in respect of immovable properties and granted relief to the assessee in relation thereto. Secondly, it is contended that the Tribunal has overlooked an important piece of evidence, a statement of wealth given by the assessee even before the Wealth-tax Act came into force, wherein he has treated both the movable and immovable properties standing in the name of his wife as exclusively belonging to her. It is also contended by the learned counsel that in any event the materials on record will clearly establish the title of the assessee's wife to the movable properties in question. As the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1956, to the Income-tax Act Officer, Salem, shows that he has enclosed his statement of wealth as also the statement of wealth of his wife along with that letter. The learned counsel points out that as per the wealth statement given by both the assessee and his wife as on March 31, 1956, both movable and immovable properties standing in the name of the wife are her independent and exclusive properties and that even if the original consideration in respect of some of the transactions, both movable and immovable properties, had proceeded from the assessee, once he had declared the properties as that of his wife, they cannot be treated as properties of the assessee on the valuation date. It is not as if the Tribunal was not aware of the wealt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unds. The assessee's explanation that he intended to make provision for his wife and, therefore, made the advances and investments in the name of his wife had not been established. The assessee executed a will on March 18, 1957. There was no reference to any provision having been made for his wife in the will though there was a reference therein to the provisions made in favour of his children. To prove such an intention there is not even the transfer of funds from the assessee's folio to the folio of his wife. In fact it is found that there is no folio in the name of the assessee's wife. On these materials the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the advances and investments made in the name of his wife are only benami for the benefit of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct could be attacked under section 66(1) as erroneous in law only when there is no evidence to support it or when it is perverse. In this case the finding of benami has been given by the Tribunal on an inference from the basic facts set out above and, therefore, it is purely one of fact. This court in a recent decision in Commissioner of Income-tax v. U. G. Krishnaswami Naidu has held that the inference drawn by the Tribunal from proved facts that a transaction was benami does not involve the application of any principle of law, and, therefore, such a finding which is purely one of fact cannot be attacked in a reference under section 66 of the Income-tax Act. The learned counsel for the assessee also contends that the Tribunal has not con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
