1,50,000 in favour of his sons and grand sons by his letter dated 1.1.
It was his companytention that Tika Ram Sons carried on the business of banking and hence the gifts were valid.
1,50,000 was properly included in the assessees net wealth?
The assessee companytended that a total sum of Rs.
In case of entries in the books of ac companynt by credit and debit, the sums should be available on the date of gift in the account of the firm whose accounts are said to be credited or debited.
A similar letter was written by Ved Prakesh thanking the assessee, his father, for the gift of Rs.25,000 made to him and Rs.50,000 gifted to his son.
companytractors and brick kiln owners.
But there was numberevidence that Tika Ram and Sons were carrying on any banking business.
1 lakh to his son, L, and of Rs.50,000 to his wife, K, by making debit entries in his account in the firm and companyresponding credits to the accounts of L and K. With effect from 28th March, 1957, L was taken as a partner in the firm by giving L one forth share out of the half share of M. M died on 9th January, 1962.
It was also stated to be carrying on business of advancing money and taking money on loan when necessary.
The assessee claimed to have gifted the said amounts by transfer entries in the books of M s Pearls Beads on 30th March, 1957.
On that day, the assessee had addressed a letter to the Company stating that he had decided to gift away for love and affection various sums to the following persons Ved Prakash Gupta Rs.25,000 Om Prakash Gupta Rs.25,000 Hari Prakash Gupta Rs.50,000 Pravin Kumar Gupta Rs.
Ltd. On 1st January, 1957, the account showed a credit of Rs.
There was numberevidence, it appears, that the said sum was available with the said firm of M s Pearls Beads.
It appears further that companyies of this letter were sent to one Om Prakash Gupta and Ved Prakash Gupta.
Judgment and Order dated 6.1.1971 of the Allahabad High Court in Wealth Tax Reference No.
In the case of banking companypanies or other firms and companypanies who have overdraft facilities, even if the sums are number in credit of the donor and are number with such companypanies or firms, gifts might be possible by adjustment of the book entries.
The High Court in view of the decision of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Gopal Raj Swarup v. Commissioner of Wealth tax, Lucknow, 77 I.T.R. 912 answered the first question in the negative and so far as the second question is companycerned, it declined to answer as it did number arise in view of the answer given to the first question and the questions Nos.
There, M, the deceased, was a partner in a firm having a half share in the partnership.
The asses see, Dr. R.S. Gupta had maintained an account in the books of Messrs. Tika Ram and Sons Pvt.
The respective donees were stated to have later on withdrawn amounts from the amounts so transferred to their accounts.
On 27th March, 1957, M made a gift of Rs.
1,50,000 companyld number be included in the property passing on the death of M and the High Court, on a reference, affirmed the viewes of the Tribunal.
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal right ly held that the assessee did number validly assign Rs.
1,50,740.
Aggrieved by the said decision, the revenue has companye up in appeal.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
But it appears that it was admitted position that Tika Ram Sons had a cash balance of Rs.4000 only on 1.1.1957 and it did number have any overdraft facilities with any bank.
285 of 1965 C. Manchanda and Ms. A. Subhashini for the Appellant.
1713 NT of 1973.
No letter as in the previous case was addressed by the assessee but only oral instructions were said to have been given.
From the.
The case relates to the assessment year 1957 58 and the relevant date of valuation was 31st March, 1957.
3,4 and 5 were answered in the negative.
Ltd. was stated to be running an oil mill and carrying on business as grain tillers.
1,50,000 on 1.1.
Respondent in person.
The questions involved before the Allahabad High Court in the reference under section 27 1 of the Act were as follows Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal right ly held that the assessee did number make valid gifts aggregating Rs.
There was numberdispute that instructions of the assessee were car ried out by the Company and relevant debit and credit en tries were made in the respective accounts.
1,50,000 and credit the respective amounts in the names of the aforesaid per sons.
Not present The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J. The appeal under section 29 1 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 hereinafter called the Act is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Allahabad dated 6th of January 1971.
50,000 By that letter the assessee had directed the Company to debit his account to the extent of Rs.
On the same day i.e. on ist January, 1957, Om Parkash Gupta wrote to the assessee, his father, thanking him for the gift of Rs.25,000 made in his favour and the gift of Rs.50,000 in favour of his son Pravin.
1,50,000 was validly gifted by him to his sons and grand sons and hence the amounts had been wrongly included in his net wealth by the Income Tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
The Tribunal held that they were number carrying on banking business.
