One Murugesa Mudaliar, the deceased, passed away on 15.10.1964.
The Tribunal found as follows These sequence of events clearly go to establish The two sums transferred by book entries were still available for purpose of the business carried on by the deceased.
Under Section 122 of the Transfer of Property Act, the gift must be accepted by the donee and an offer without acceptance of the donee cannot companyplete the gift .
As numbericed, the deceased passed away on 15.10.1964.
Accordingly, a partnership was formed with effect from 1.8.1962 in which the donees and also the donor were the partners.
Rajeswari and Gnanambigai by debiting his capital account and crediting their accounts in his personal business book.
While accepting the gift, the donees have stipulated for retention of the gifted amounts in the business of the deceased and admit them as partners.
The Revenue aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal moved the High Court by way of reference.
Again on 27.7.62 each donee by separate letters thanking once again tor the gifts requested the deceased to retain the same in the business and admit them as partners.
On 20.7.1962.
He was carrying on a business under the name and style of Newton Company a proprietory companycern.
On 20.7.62, both the donee wrote letters to the deceased accepting the gifts and thanking their father.
The accountable persons appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Tribunal for short and the Tribunal found that the gifts in question did number fall within the ambit of section 10 of the Act and companysequently they were number liable to estate duty.
the deceased made two cash gifts of Rs.40,000/ each to his two daughters, namely Smt.
Venkataswami, J. In this appeal by a certificate granted by the High Court of Madras under section 65 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 hereinafter referred to as the Act , the vexed question of applicability or otherwise of section, 10 of the Act arises for decision of this Court.
