9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (9) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te and the assessee and his adopted son, Shri K. B. Ramachandra Raj Urs, were the sole surviving heirs and, as such, had equal share under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 in the property left by her. Both the properties were acquired by the Government of Karnataka and compensation was awarded but, being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, the assessee filed suit in the Court for a larger ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bring to tax the amount of gift. 1a. The assessee contended that though the assessee's son had shown this sum of Rs. 5,12,000 in his return of net wealth, his son had made the following payments towards various taxes, on behalf of the assessee between 19th Sept., 1966 to 14th March, 1975. The amount, details of which are given in assessment order, is Rs. 2,56,980 i.e. slightly more than the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s no intention to forego his half share. The failure to include his half share in the wealth-tax return was only a mistake. The AAC observed that to the extent the assessee's son had made the payments of Rs. 19,186 on behalf of the assessee before 31st March, 1967, there could be no question of any gift. Even, as regards, the balance, it could only be said to be an omission on the part of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that there was no intention to make a gift of the amount by relinquishing the assessee's half share in favour of his son. The amount was allowed to remain with his son as certain taxes had to be paid and a statement filed on page 3 of the paper book shows the taxes paid by the assessee's son, on behalf of the assessee. The correctness of this statement on page 3 has not been disputed by the lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
