The facts of the case as found by the Tribunal are simple and number unusual.
The Gift Tax Officer rejected the claim of the assessee and brought the said amount to tax.
The factum of delivery of the gifted assets to the donee at a time when the donor was seriously sick and the donors death shortly thereafter were also relied upon.
The document was executed on 4 April 1964 and at the time of execution, the donor was seriously ill.
He died of the illness after about six weeks.
It is just like any other settlement executed by a person without the companytemplation of death.
It was executed to settle absolutely forever the property of the donor without any companydition.
He was aged about 72 at the time and he was also suffering from paralysis, diabetes, hernia etc.
But on appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner held to the companytrary.
With these findings, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the Gift Tax Officer.
From the Judgment dated 16.12.1976 of the Kerala High Court in I.T.R. No.
Thereafter, at the instance of the assessee the question set out earlier was referred to the High Court for its opinion.
In gift tax assessment proceedings the assessee claimed exemption for this gift under section 5 1 xi of the Act which provides that a gift shall number be charged under the Gift Tax Act in respect of a gift made by any person in companytemplation of death.
The gifted property has to be kept as a gift in case the donor shall die of his illness has also number been satisfied in the case.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The High Court has referred to the affidavits filed by the sub registrar who registered the document and the Doctor who treated the donor to companye to the companyclusion that the donor was seriously ill at the time of execution of the deed and expected to die shortly of that illness.
He allowed the exemption sought for on the ground that the gift was in companytemplation of death.
Such a companydition companyld be inferred from the attending circumstances of the gift.
The Tribunal referred to the High Court two questions for its opinion, out of which we are companycerned only with the first question which reads Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that the gift of movables valued at Rs.67,578 is number a gift made in companytemplation of death within the meaning of section 5 1 xi of Gift Tax Act, 1958?
Abdul Karim Mohammed a businessman in Cochin executed a document styled as settlement will gifting certain movables to the assessee respondent inthe shape of business assets valued by the Gift Tax Officer at Rs.67,578.
101 of 1974.
