9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 626X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... VNA NALINKANT NANAVATI [ 2002 (1) TMI 48 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] where the settlor was also the sole beneficiary was held to be a valid trust. Revenue did not show us any bar in the trust act where the settlor cannot be beneficiary of that trust. Assessee also submitted identical structures in case of Mahartana Companies, which were not found be violating Trust Act. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the Escorts Limited being the settlor and sole beneficiary of the trust. Assessment of the trustee in Representative capacity in terms of provision of section 160 and 161 of The Income tax Act - In the present case, the income on behalf of the beneficiary i.e. M/s Escorts Ltd. is received by the assessee. Therefore it is liable to be assessed as a representative assesse as the income earned by it for the benefit of Escorts Ltd. On appeal, the ld CIT (A) reversed the position. CIT(A) has misconstrued the issue. All that the appellant had contended was that the AO having accepted the status of a representative assessee, should have carried the matter to its logical conclusion by exempting the dividend income u/s 10(34) of the Act, in conformity with the provisions of Section 161(1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt u/s 143(3) of the Act without demur -The income of the assessee is required to be assessed by the Assessing officer as defined u/s 2(7A) of The Income Tax Act according to the provisions and procedures enshrined there in. The schemes of merger, amalgamation and corporate restructuring may grant certain relief or concession to the parties, but it cannot be said that even if they are in violation of the tax lawsit should be accepted by revenue as it is. Thus merely because schemes of corporate restructuring sanctioned by the high court or any other authority does not prevent assessing office in assessing the Income of the assessee. Off course, necessary relief granted may be allowed by him. In conclusion, Ground No.3 is disposed-off in terms indicated. Conclusions drawn from the statements of the trustees recorded u/s 131 and allegation of tax evasion thus creation of the trust being a colorable device - Adverting to the view expressed by the AO and the Ld. CIT(A) that the trustees have acted on a notional basis and that the real trustee is EL along with being the settlor and the sole beneficiary, at the outset , we hold that the appellant trust was formed with the sole object of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer in exceeding his jurisdiction by not accepting a Scheme of Arrangement and amalgamation duly sanctioned by Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, pursuant to which the appellant trust got created, and the said scheme having been examined by the assessing authorities of the respective companies involved in amalgamation in their assessments completed u/s 143(3) of the Act. 4. Without prejudice to Grounds (1) & (2) & (3), the learned CIT(Appeals) ought to have quashed the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) by the Assessing Officer in the status of 'Trust" which is not a 'person' defined in section 2(31) of the Act, as against the status of 'AOP/BOI' declared in the return. The learned CIT (Appeals) further erred in treating this incurable defect as a bonafide mistake covered u/s 292B of the Act. 5. That the learned CIT (A) further erred in law in reversing the action of the Assessing Officer in treating the appellant as a 'Representative Assessee' as defined in section 160(1)(iv) without any notice to the assessee and in clear violation of the principles of natural justice. 6. That the learned CIT (A) further erred in not disposing of Ground No.9 raised before him in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce Limited EFILL Benefit Trust and Escotrac Benefit Trust were also set up vide trust deeds dated February 14, 2012. It was further provided that upon the Scheme becoming effective, for operational convenience, the beneficial interest in EFILL Benefit Trust and Escotrac Benefit Trust would stand transferred and vested in the trustees of EBWT, and consequently, the EFILL Benefit Trust and the Escotrac Benefit Trust shall be deemed to have been dissolved / revoked.The Scheme was sanctioned by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana vide order dated September 5, 2012 and became effective upon filing of the same with the Registrar of Companies. Consequently, EBWT was allotted equity shares of EL as consideration of merger of ECEL with EL; and the investments/shares held by EFILL and Escotrac were transferred through their respective Trusts to EBWT, for the sole benefit of EL. 3. In this background, For AY 2016-17 the appellant filed its return in the status of an Association of Persons [ AOP] declaring income of Rs. Nil by claiming the dividend of ₹ 4,47,60,037/- as exempt u/s 10(34) of the Income Tax Act, 1961("the Act"). In the assessment proceedings the assessing officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... through dubious means and to transfer the money to the company itself through a web of transactions in the name of exempted income." 4. The LDAO referred to the provisions of Section 3 of the Indian Trust Act, 1882. According to the LD AO,there cannot be a case where the creator of the trust would also be the sole beneficiary. There also cannot be a case where the creator of the trust would also be trustee and the sole beneficiary, because in that case a man cannot enforce a trust against himself. The AO also alleged of "tax evasion" on the appellant by referring to the receipt of shares by the trusts without consideration, non-payment of capital gains on the transfer and the receipt of exempt dividend by the impugned trust without payment of taxes thereof. Thus, On 24th December 2018, the ld AO issued a final "Show Cause Notice" as under :- "I. Why the status of M/s Escorts Benefit & Welfare Trust as trust may not be rejected as prima facie this impugned trust is merely structure of colourable device to control the majority shareholding of the Escorts Limited and to hoodwink the department to evade the tax? II. Why the dividend income may not be taxed as income from other so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trac shall individually, under, pursuant to and by virtue of this Scheme and simultaneous to all other steps/actions pursuant to this Scheme and on the effective date and without any further act or deed or matter of thing, transfer all the shares of Escorts and Escorts Finance Limited held by them on such date to the Board of Trustees of the EFILL Benefit Trust and the Escotrac Benefit Trust respectively to have and to hold EFILL and Escotrac's investment in share of Escorts and Escorts Finance Limited in trust together with all additions or accretions thereto in trust for the benefit of EFILL and Escotrac respectively and its successor or successors subject to the powers, provisions, decisions rights and agreements contained in the instrument (" the Trust Deed") establishing the aforesaid trusts ("the EFILL Benefit Trust" and "the Escotrac Benefit Trust") on such terms and conditions as may be set out in the Trust Deed. The Trusts shall be settled by EFILL and Escotrac respectively upon the approval of the Scheme by its Board of Directors and prior to the filing of the petition for sanction of the Scheme before the Hon'ble High Court. Further, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to notices u/s 131 have stated that they were not the trustees as on the date of creation of the trust. They also stated that there is no day-today transaction in the trust except for one-time receipt of dividend in a year, which is remitted back to the settler. Accordingly, the adverse inferences drawn by you are not justified. Adverting to the points raised in your show cause notice we have to submit as below: - I. Why the status of M/s Escorts Benefit & Welfare Trust as trust may not be rejected as prima facie this impugned trust is merely structure of colourable device to control the majority shareholding of the Escorts Limited and to hoodwink the department to evade the tax? 1. The Scheme is duly sanctioned by the hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court and is now law unto itself. To question its existence & status today tantamount to contempt of Court'. 2. The Trust is not a party to the Scheme but is only a resultant entity. The parties to the Scheme are the four companies involved in the amalgamation. After the merger came into effect from the appointed date of 1st October 2011, the assessments of all the concerned companies for the AY 2012-13 have been complete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons to evade the taxes with the objective of transfer the money to the company itself through a web of transactions in the name of exempted income. 1. It is indeed very unfortunate to call the Scheme as arrangement of sham transactions to evade taxes particularly so when the scheme is sanctioned by the Hon'ble Court. 2 Your show cause query does not mention a single instance of tax evasion. The dividend is exempted whosoever receives it once DDT is paid by the company as per section 115-0. In this case, Escorts is the payer of the dividend and the recipient through the trust, which effectively neutralizes the payment/receipt, the net gainer being the Exchequer getting taxes by way of DDT. So therefore, there is no question of any objective to transfer money by way of exempted income to the settler company. 6. As the assessing authority of the assessee trust, you are constrained to compute the taxable income under the relevant heads of income as applicable to the beneficiary and compute the tax liability, if any, which would have been chargeable from the beneficiary, which in this case is nil due to exempted dividend income. 7. There is no question of bringing the receip ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed by the assessee. The issue is not having sole beneficiary but the issue is having settlor as sole beneficiary." 10.5.3.1 "This provision requires that the creation of Trust is reposing of confidence or in other words it is an obligation arising out of confidence reposed by the settlor -owner of a property in the person to whom the properties are entrusted for the benefit of another." He held that trust has been created in violation of provision of section 3 of the Indian Trust Act and the basic tenets of the trust are missing in this case. In substances, this is not a separate and legal entity guided by its deed of formation, but controlled and guided by the board and promoters of Escorts Limited. The mere purpose of the seems to have control over shares of the Escorts Limited through dubious means and to transfer the money to the company itself through a web of transactions in names of exempted income. Thus the LD AO held that in the case of the assessee, M/s Escorts Limited is the settlor, it is the trustee and as well as sole beneficiary who is barred by the section 3 of the Indian Trust Act. 8. On the question of tax evasion the AO observed as follows in Para 10.7.5 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same was exempt under the provisions of Income Tax Act. Reliance was placed upon the provisions of section 10(34) r.w.s. 115-O of the Act. iii. That the shares of M/s EL have been held by the appellant in a Demat account which has been opened in the name of the Trustees (Dr. S.A. Dave and Sh. Pritam Singh) as in case of the private trust, the Demat account has to be opened in the name of the trustees. Further, in the regulatory filing of share holding pattern with the stock exchanges and in the financial statements by M/s EL, name of the trust has been shown as the shareholder through the trustees. iv. That the sanction of the Amalgamation and arrangement Scheme by the Hon'ble High court means approval for the Trusts created thereunder. v. Those similar practices have been adopted by M/s Indian Oil Corporation, M/s Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. by creating similar trusts in their respective amalgamation schemes. vi. That the appellant trust has been created with M/s EL being its sole beneficiary. Therefore, it should have been treated as a representative assessee of M/s EL u/s 160 of the Act and accordingly tax liability should have been computed in the like manner and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eived by it as a valid shareholder, it cannot be treated as dividend. ix. As the appellant has been found to be an invalid trust as per the provisions of the Trust Act it could not be held to be a "representative assessee" of EL. x. That the appellant shall be assessed as an "AOP/BOI" as prescribed u/s 2(31) of the Act as against the status of "Trust" accorded inadvertantly in the assessment order, such bonafide mistake being covered u/s 292B of the Act. 13. Being aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us.The Ld. Authorized Representative submitted that :- (A) Validity of the Trust (under the Indian Trusts Act, 1882) That the interpretation of Section 3 of the Trust Act by the AO and thereafter by the Ld. CIT(A) was erroneous, in as much as they had equated an 'owner' to the author or settlor of the trust whereas the reference was to the 'trustee'. In other words the bar was not on the settlor being the sole beneficiary but on a trustee being in that position since an individual cannot enforce a trust against himself. To canvass the aforesaid proposition the Ld. Counsel relied on the following judgements: i. Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er book). (vii) That in the regulatory filing before the stock exchanges, the shares had been declared as held by the trustee Shri S.A. Dave(refer page 228 of the paper book). To the same effect was the depiction in the Balance Sheet of Escorts Ltd. as at 31.03.2016(Page 229 of the paper book). (viii) That in the final Show Cause Notice dated 24th December, 2018 the AO sought a response on a question framed as under (page 27 of the Assessment Order) "Why the status of M/s Escorts Benefit & Welfare Trust may not be rejected as prima facie this impugned trust is merely structure of colourable device to control the majority shareholding of Escorts Ltd. and to hoodwink the department to evade the tax?" (ix) According to the Ld. Counsel the submission before the Ld. CIT(A) on the aforesaid query finds place at page 6 of the order in the following words: "Companies often prefer to hold their own shares through trusts after merger(with themselves as beneficiary) instead of cancelling the shares. Before the Companies Act, 2013 came in force, a company in India could own and hold its own shares via the merger/amalgamation route. Various Indian companies including some large PSUs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in (2018) 100 Taxmann.com 284(Bom). (D) Representative Assessee On this issue the ld AR submitted that :- i. That the AO had himself decided to treat the appellant as a 'representative assessee' within the meaning of Section 160(1)(iv) of the Act for raising the demand and collection of Govt. dues. ii. That the aforesaid status of 'representative assessee' was reaffirmed by the AO in his remand report to the Ld. CIT(A) (Page 39 of the order) in the following words: "Section 160(1)(iv) clearly states that trustee in the receipt of the income on behalf of the beneficiary can be treated as representative assessee. In the present case, the income on behalf of the beneficiary i.e. M/s Escorts Ltd. is received by the assessee. Therefore, it is liable to be assessed as a representative assessee as the income earned by it for the benefit of Escorts Ltd. Therefore, in any view of the matter, the taxability of the impugned amounts lies in the hands of the impugned trust." iii. That after treating the appellant as a representative assessee, the AO did not follow mandate of section 161(1) of the Act by subjecting the dividend to tax u/s 56 of the Act, denying the benefit of exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he statements to hold that the Trust was a colourable device and that EL combined in itself the role of the settlor, the trustee as the sole beneficiary. The further arguments are summarized as under: i. That the statements of an ex-trustee and two current trustees had been recorded u/s 131 of the Act(pages 8 to 12 of the assessment order) in their capacity as "trustees" and not as "witnesses" vis-à-vis information which was already on record in the form of a court order sanctioning a Scheme of Amalgamation u/s 391 & 394 of the Companies Act. ii. That adverse conclusions drawn did not emanate from the questions/answers and were imaginary as would be apparent from the following chart of rebuttal submitted before the Ld. CIT(A): AO Assessee In the statement recorded on oath, none of the trustees knew why the Impugned trust was created and what the purpose of the creation of the impugned trust was. The trustees did not recollect the source of income of the impugned trust and as regards, the expenses of the impugned trust, it has been submitted that the expenses should have been only on staff perhaps. Moreover, the other two trustees have submitted during the course of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent under oath during the course of recording of his statement u/s. 131 of the I.T. Act,1961. This is entirely incorrect. The false statement is attributed to an alleged contradiction between the statements of Mr. Dave & Mr. Mathur. Pertinent to mention that Mr. Mathur's statement was recorded much after the statement of Mr. Dave was available with the Assessing Officer. Principles of natural justice demand that Mr. Mathur should have been confronted with the reply of his cotrustee if there was any contradiction or else he should have been given an opportunity to crossexamine the other trustee. None of this has been done and conclusion of misleading the department has been drawn arbitrarily without any opportunity and initiated proceedings against Mr. G B Mathur u/s 277. iii. That the tax authorities had picked up individual questions/answers in the statements to draw adverse conclusions, whereas it is settled law that a document had to be read and interpreted as a whole. Reverting to the individual statements it was highlighted: (a) Shri S.A. Dave He was a trustee till 27th October 2016, more than 80 years old and his statement was recorded at Mumbai on 19.12.2018, where h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings have been initiated against Shri G.B. Mathur, trustee……." That since the statement of Shri Dave itself was recorded contrary to accepted legalnorms as already submitted anything stated by him could not in law form the basis for initiation of an action as extreme as prosecution against Shri Mathur. iv. According to the Ld. Counsel without prejudice to any other arguments, the statement of Shri Dave having been used against Shri Mathur without confronting him with the same and further denying him the opportunity to cross-examine Shri Dave, was required to be ignored. v. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant also referred to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the conclusions drawn by him in respect of the statements spanning paras 10.2.4 to 10.2.8 of his order, drawing specific attention to paras 10.2.7 and 10.2.8 which were in the following terms: "10.2.7 From the examination of facts and discussion as made above, it is noted that Sh. G.B. Mathur and Sh. Ajay Sharma have been appointed as trustees of the appellant merely because they were under the employment of M/s EL and thus were under the direct control of M/s EL. They were not having any prior experien ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s it can be seen that the appellant did not show any independent existence." vi. According to the Ld. Counsel the revenue being unable to find any illegality in the terms of the trust deed and the appointment of the trustees picked up issues as minor and irrelevant as the address, the incurring of nominal expenditure, the non-existence of a computer and expecting strangers with prior experience to be appointed as trustees without indicating the statutory provision or the rule which mandated so and debarred persons known to the settlor with impeccable qualifications to be appointed as trustees. The conclusion therefore that the trustees have not operated independently and that EL has combined in itself the role of the settlor, the Trustee and the sole beneficiary is baseless and not well founded. 14. The Ld. Departmental representative strongly supported the order passed by AO and the Ld. CIT (A). 15. We have carefully considered rival contentions and perused the orders of the lower authorities. Apparently the grievances of the appellant are (i) validity of the trust vide Section 3 of the Indian Trust Act, 1882, (ii) the decision of the tax authorities to treat EL as the set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he 3[Assessing] Officer,- (i) where the trust has been declared before the 1st day of June, 1981, within a period of three months from that day; and (ii) in any other case, within three months from the date of declaration of the trust. Explanation 2.-For the purposes of clause (v), "oral trust" means a trust which is not declared by a duly executed instrument in writing [including any wakf deed which is valid under the Mussalman Wakf Validating Act, 1913 (6 of 1913),] and which is not deemed under Explanation 1 to be a trust declared by a duly executed instrument in writing.] (2) Every representative assessee shall be deemed to be an assessee for the purposes of this Act. 17. Section 161(1) of the Act deals with the liability of a representative assessee as under :- Liability of representative assessee. 161. (1) Every representative assessee, as regards the income in respect of which he is a representative assessee, shall be subject to the same duties, responsibilities and liabilities as if the income were income received by or accruing to or in favour of him beneficially, and shall be liable to assessment in his own name in respect of that income; but any su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore is shown as income. No doubt assessee being professional directors of the group or are independent persons may not be knowing each and everything about the trust, but they are trustees, they have the responsibility assigned to them in the Indian trust act as well as other regulatory laws including Income tax. However, that does not mean that they should know each thing, howsoever small it may be. That is neither the responsibility cast up on them by general nor any specific law. Undoubtedly, the trust is belonging to Escorts Ltd , it is the settlor and it is the beneficiary. However, that does not mean that it is the trustee also. The ld AO has not brought on record any evidence to show that Escorts Limited is the trustee of the assessee. Therefore, the allegation of ld AO that Escorts Limited is also the trustee is devoid of any merit and based on mere conjectures and surmises. Further the sole beneficiary is Escorts Limited and Settlor r of the trustis Escorts Limited is the major reason why the ld AO is refusing to recognize the above trust. Honorable Gujarat High court has answered it in BHAVNA NALINKANT NANAVATI vs. COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX (2002) 70 CCH 0059 Guj HC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt in his own name in respect of that income ; but any such assessment is deemed to be made upon him in his representative capacity only, and the tax is levied upon and recovered from him in like manner and to the same extent as it would be leviable upon and recoverable from the person represented by him. And section 166 of the Act clarifies that the provisions relating to the liability of a representative assessee will not prevent either the direct assessment of the person on whose behalf or for whose benefit income is receivable, or the recovery from such person of the tax payable in respect of such income. The Income-tax Officer has the option to proceed either against the trustee or against the beneficiary, but in either case, the income to be assessed must be in the same sum. What the trustee receives as the income pertaining to the beneficiary is received by him under an obligation to pass on that income to the beneficiary." 20. Further Hon Supreme court in case of CIT vs. Smt. Kamalini Khatau[1994] 209 ITR 101 (SC) held that when an assessment is made in the hands of the trustee it can be made only in terms of the provisions of Sections 160 to 166 of the Act, which did ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said dividend in the case of EL the beneficiary, the same would not be taxable since the dividend was exempt u/s 10(34) of the Act. There is no reason for the ld AO to treat it as any other receipt other than dividend and then to tax it as income from other sources. Admittedly, in this case the dividend is subject to dividend distribution tax. According to section 10 (34 ) of the act same is exempt as under : (34) any income by way of dividends referred to in section 115-O : 25[Provided that nothing in this clause shall apply to any income by way of dividend chargeable to tax in accordance with the provisions of section 115BBDA;] 22. The claim of the ld AO is that this is the income distributed by Escorts Limited as dividend on its shares held by the assessee trust , which has been paid to the assessee trust for the benefit of Escorts Limited. Therefore, the ld AO held it to be a tax evasion devise. We note that ld AO has forgotten the facts that in fact Escorts Limited pays dividend distribution tax on such dividend received by the assessee for the benefit of Escorts Limited. According to us, it cannot be tax evasion devise for the reason that firstly Escorts Limited ea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e absence of any statutory provision has substantial merit. Revenue could not show us any provision in the act, which can change the characterization of dividend receipt as income from other sources. Such rights are probably available the ld AO, if at all, u/s 98 of the act only in case of impermissible avoidance arrangement. Such is not the case in the impugned appeal. Thus, In our opinion the AO was not justified in changing the nature of the receipt, which continued to remain a dividend irrespective of whatever view was expressed in the assessment. Hence, we hold that the appellant was required to be assessed in the status of a 'representative assessee' and consequently to the same tax treatment as would have been accorded to the beneficiary vis exemption u/s 10(34) in respect of the dividend of ₹ 4,47,60,037/-. The addition on the said account is accordingly deleted. 26. As a consequence of the directions aforesaid, the latter part of Ground No.2 whereby the taxability of the dividend is challenged is allowed with the further observation that the challenge to the validity of the trust u/s 3 of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882 having become academic, since, the assessment has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourse, necessary relief granted may be allowed by him. In conclusion, Ground No.3 is disposed-off in terms indicated. 29. Taking up Ground No. 6 which encompasses two issues (1) conclusions drawn from the statements of the trustees recorded u/s 131 of the Act and (2) allegation of tax evasion thus creation of the trust being a "colorable device".We must observe at the outset that both the AO and the Ld. CIT(A) have stressed more on the statements of the trustees to draw adverse inferences, basing these on surmises and conjectures rather than reality. The ld AO has held that trustees do not know the object and purposes of the trust or other minute facts about the operation of the trust. This issue has already been discussed us , therefore does not deserves repletion. The ld AO has picked up 'words and phrases" from the statements rather than considering them as a whole. The ld AO totally ignored that the trustee have attended the meetings, holding the property and have fulfilled their duties as the trustees. Coming to the statements, recorded Shri S.A. Dave was an ex-trustee aged above 80 years, having no relationship with EL or the appellant trust for a last 3 years. He was not al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an assumption, there being no legal basis for an adverse view on the common address of the appellant trust and M/s EL. 30. Further In Para 10.1 of his order the Ld. CIT(A) makes certain observations to draw a conclusion that the appellant trust is not irrevocable and for the said purpose refers to Para 4.6 of the trust deed which states as follows: "4.6.2 The Trustees will be bound to follow the terms and conditions and such other stipulations as may be intimated to them by way of written instructions for selling, pledging, mortgaging, encumbering or creating lien of any kind on the EL shares." 31. We cannot accept argument of the revenue that the aforesaid clause is repugnant to the creation of an 'irrevocable trust' and that the sole beneficiary is barred from giving any instructions, when the trust itself is created for its benefit. A reference is made to the trust deed in the case of Indian Oil Corporation which contains the following clause (b): (Page 186 of the Paper Book) (b) "The Trustees shall, within the term or the varied term, of and when instructed by the settlor in writing……. sell, transfer or dispose-off the Trust Fund upon receipt of written i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
