9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (5) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amily settlement amongst members of the family and that the decree obtained from the civil court was collusive ?" The facts relevant to the question of law referred, are: Banarsi Lal Aggarwal, the assessee, was being assessed to wealth-tax in the status of an individual. He owned a property styled as Banarsi Lal Aggarwal Rice and General Mills, Kaithal, consisting of land, machinery and building. The mill was constructed in the year 1959-60. Ever since then, this property was shown as individual property in the wealth-tax return of the assessee up to the assessment year 1972-73. For the assessment year 1972-73, the value of 1/4th share in the net wealth return was shown by the assessee and the remaining 3/4ths share was said to have bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h was considered to be a deemed gift by the assessee in view of the provisions contained in section 4(1)(a) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). After allowing the basic exemption of Rs. 5,000, the Gift-tax Officer arrived at the value of taxable gift at Rs. 2,43,856 against the value returned at Rs. nil. The Commissioner of Gift-tax (Appeals), before whom an appeal was filed by the assessee, confirmed the order of the Gift-tax Officer and held it to be a case of gift. The value adopted by the Gift-tax Officer was confirmed. The assessee filed a further appeal before the Tribunal. On behalf of the assessee, the primary contention raised before the Tribunal was that a family settlement had, in fact, taken place ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been referred to this court for its opinion. Counsel for the parties have been heard. Mr. Hemant Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the assessee, argued that it was a case of family settlement. As the assessee had failed to repay the loans as well as the interest thereon, the property in question partook of the character of Hindu undivided family property regarding which a family settlement could be arrived at within the family. As against this, the submission of Mr. R. P. Sawhney, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue, is that the property was an individual property of the assessee in which the wife and the four sons of the assessee, to whom the property had been transferred, did not have any antecedent title, claim or interest and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uired property by the assessee to the five persons concerned without adequate consideration and was, therefore, a case of deemed gift under section 4(1)(a) of the Act. The Supreme Court of India in Kale v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, AIR 1976 SC 807, has clearly laid down that the members of the family claiming family partition must have antecedent title, claim or interest in the disputed property. It was also held that the family settlement must be bona fide so as to resolve the family dispute. In the present case, regarding the property in question, there could possibly be no dispute between the assessee on the one hand and his wife and four sons on the other because the property was an individual property of the assessee in whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
