1992 (11) TMI 23

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hat, in view of the fact that Rani Surendrakumari had given up all her claims, title and interest as a beneficiary under the deed of relinquishment dated January 19, 1972, and as she was not entitled to any income in view of this relinquishment and since other beneficiaries did not have any taxable income, the trust was liable to tax at the appropriate rate of tax and not at the higher rate of 65 per cent. is correct in law and sustainable from the material on record ?" The above questions have come to be referred to us in the following background : The assessee is a private discretionary trust. We are concerned with the assessment year 1972-73. The Income-tax Officer, in the course of the assessment proceedings, finding that one of the b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... her rate of 65 per cent. The Tribunal scrutinised the contention of the assessee with reference to the relinquishment of the right of Rani Surendrakumari as the beneficiary and her declaration that she derived no income as a beneficiary and held that this position is acceptable. Since the other beneficiaries did not have any taxable income, the assessee was held by the Tribunal as not chargeable to tax at the rate of 65 per cent. Of the two questions, we feel, we should find an answer to question No. 2 first. If the answer to question No. 2 should be in favour of the assessee, necessarily we have to answer question No. 1 also in favour of the assessee. The reasons are obvious. Only when Rani Surendrakumari could have the role of a benefic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... income were the total income of an association of persons". On the question as to whether Rani Surendrakumari relinquished her right as a beneficiary, the Tribunal has adverted to the deed of relinquishment and a categoric finding has been rendered on appreciation and assessment of the recitals therein that she had released her beneficial interest and she was in fact not entitled to any income as a beneficiary in view of the relinquishment during the relevant previous year. We find that this finding rendered by the Tribunal is purely in the factual sphere and we have not been shown any feature to differ from the view taken by the Tribunal in the factual sphere. We could not characterise the finding rendered by the Tribunal as perverse or .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X