9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (12) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... K. Mehta, who died on 22nd Nov., 1974. The only ground in this appeal states that the Appellate Controller was not justified in deleting a sum of Rs. 25,464 from the principal value of the estate of the deceased. This amount represented the insurance policy taken under the Married Women's Property Act. The case of the assessee was that the proceeds of the insurance received on maturity was assessa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld not be said to be a gift or disposition in favour of a relative. In this view of the matter, he deleted addition. 3. Shri T. S. Srinivasan, the ld. representative for the Department urged before us that the Appellate Controller was not justified in his decision. He stated that the premium by the deceased was gift made to a relative within two years prior to his death and so it was taxable un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ft within the meaning of s. 9 of the ED Act. 5. We have considered the contentions of both the parties as well as the facts on record. We find force in the contentions raised by the assessee. The language of s. 9(1) speaks of an immediate gift and so the premia paid by the assessee to the insurer cannot be said to be a gift to his wife. This is clear from a plain reading of s. 9(1). we find tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
