TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 818X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her to a court of law for a partition and that suit ultimately ended into a compromise, whereby half share of house No. 646 had fallen to the share of the daughter of the assessee. In the said compromise the other co-owners had also given their no objections for entering into a compromise. Since it was a family dispute and ultimately good sense prevailed amongst them, thus this compromise was entered into. The other co-owners specifically mentioned in their no objections filed before the civil court that since all are well off and, therefore, they are not interested to have their share in the property. In such an event, the circumstances under which half of the share fell to the daughter of the assessee can only be said to be a family arran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 2, 1966. After the death of Sannappa, the assessee having become the absolute owner of the said properties, executed a sale deed thereof in favour of the third party for a sum of Rs. 80,000. Out of the aforesaid sale consideration so received by the assessee, she purchased property bearing No. 646, Chamaraja, Double Road, Mysore, from her husband by a registered sale deed dated June 14, 1978, for a sum of Rs. 95,000. Sri P. N. Subbarayappa, manager of the family of the assessee died in November 1979. He had died intestate. According to the assessee, since he had died intestate, all family members would have a right in the property left behind by him. The assessee' s one of the daughters Smt S. Vanajakshi filed a suit for partition against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icer issued notice to the assessee calling upon her to file gift-tax return for the assessment year 1997-98. In response to the same, the assessee filed a return of gift stating therein that she has not made any gift, taxable under the Gift-tax Act and, therefore, not liable to pay any gift-tax. The Assessing Officer after considering the matter computed the chargeable gift at Rs. 18,00,000. The assessee feeling aggrieved by the said order preferred an appeal to the Commissioner of Gift-tax (Appeals), Mysore. The Commissioner of Gift-tax (Appeals) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal. The assessee was, therefore, constrained to file further appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the circumstances under which half of the share fell to the daughter of the assessee can only be said to be a family arrangement, but it cannot be said that such a device was adopted by the assessee so as to avoid payment of gift-tax. In fact, the Tribunal has also proceeded on the aforesaid ground only and found that for such a transaction no gift tax could have been levied. We are in full agreement with the findings recorded by the Tribunal and there is no reason to doubt the correctness of the compromise decree entered into between the parties. In this view of the matter, we find that there is no merit or substance in this appeal. The appeal would stand dismissed accordingly. The question of law is answered against the Revenue and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
