9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (2) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el of the said school would be maintained out of such income: (c) Rs. 500 would be spent out of such income, every year on charity left to the discretion of the trustees. The settlor as long as be continued as the trustee would, however, be at liberty to spend up to Rs. 20,000 and his son, Ganendra Kumar, when he would act as the trustee would be at liberty to spend up to Rs. 1,000 per year on charity ; (d) Expenses on pilgrimage for the members of the family of the settlor would be paid out of the income of the trust properties at the discretion of the trustees ; (e) The cost of maintenance and medical attendance and treatment of the settlor, his sons, his grandsons and members of their respective families including marriage, "ann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the sole trustee of the trust during the term of the trust. After the death or retirement of the settlor, his son, Ganendra Kumar, would be the sole trustee till his death or retirement when the latter's sons, Gunendra Kumar and Subodh Kumar, would become the trustees along with Krishna Kumar, another grandson of the settlor by a predeceased son, when the latter attained 25 years of age. Harendra Kumar Roy Chowdhury, the settlor, acted as the sole trustee till August 13, 1936, when he died. After his death, Ganendra Kumar became the sole trustee of the said trust and he continued as such till August 3, 1952, when he died leaving behind him surviving four sons, the eldest being Gunendra Kumar. Gunendra Kumar died on August 7, 1955, durin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e trust came to an end. The Tribunal after construing section 23 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, came to the conclusion that the interest of the deceased in the trust estate failed or determined by reason of his death before such interest became an interest in possession. By reason of the trust having continued under the directions contained in the trust deed, limitations under the settlement continued to subsist after the death. A decision of the Supreme Court in Mahendra Rambhai Patel v. CED [1961] 63 ITR 645 (SC) was cited before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the said decision was distinguishable on facts as the trust property involved in that case belonged to the beneficiary ab initio and only the delivery of such property to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the failure or determination of that interest." The language of the section is clear. On the specific terms of the trust deed, it cannot be contended that the interest of the deceased in the trust property before the trust came to an end by efflux of time would be an interest in possession as contemplated by the section. The facts in this case have been correctly distinguished from the facts which were before the Supreme Court in Mahendra Rambhai Patel v. CED [1967] 63 ITR 645. Unlike the beneficiary before the Supreme Court, the deceased in this case is not a direct beneficiary under the trust and cannot claim the entire income of the trust. The interest being not an interest in possession but possibly an interest in expectancy, sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
