Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (10) TMI 1004 - ITAT BANGALORE

2015 (10) TMI 1004 - ITAT BANGALORE - TMI - Validity of assessment under Gift Tax act - period of limitation - contention of the counsel that the AO must have made a ‘fresh assessment’ within the time limit prescribed u/s 16A(3) of the GT Act, 1958 and not an ‘assessment or re-assessment’ that is referred to under the provisions of section 16A(4) of the GT Act, 1958 - whether case is time barred u/s 16A(3) of the GT Act, 1958? - Held that:- CGT(A) having received the order on 27-05-1999, ought t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Gift Tax (A), Bangalore dated 19-11-2013 for the assessment year : 1981-82. 2. The assessee was served with notice u/s 16(1) of the GT Act for the relevant assessment year. The assessee filed the return declaring NIL gift. 2.1 The facts of the case are that the assessee is one of the daught4ers of late Maharaja of Mysore Sri J.C.Wadiyar. There was partial partition in the family of Sri J.C.Wadiyar in which .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

shared by Sri J.C.Wadiyar, who had enjoyed all his properties and thus the remaining properties exclusively belong to him. While the suit was pending, Sri J.C.Wadiyar dies on 23-09-1974. 2.2 Accordingly the learned assessing authority was of the opinion that the assessee had 1/14th share in the properties of HUF. Similarly, the learned assessing authority also was of the opinion tht the assessee had 1/7th share in the assets of the minor HUF of late Sri J.C.Wadiyar. 2.3 In the meanwhile, the sui .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

6 of the Hindu Succession Act and accordingly, the assessee had 1/14th share in the properties of the HUF and also 1/7th share of the properties in the minor HUF. The revenue has accordingly held that by surrendering their shares in the HUF in favour of the brother by the sisters, there was a deemed gift as contemplated u/s 4(1)(c ) f the Gift Tax Act, 1958 and accordingly the learned assessing authority valued the assets of the HUF and determined the gift for gift tax. The matter was taken to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

6-11-1998 held that the gift tax liability of the assessee is to be computed at ₹ 1,41,81,620/-. 4. Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal before the CGT(A). The CGT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following grounds; 1. The order as passed by held.CGT(A) is against the law and facts of the case. 2. The ld.CGT(A) ought to have appreciated that the Hon ble ITAT vide its order dated 26-11-1998 in GTA No.29(Bang.)/1990 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

-assessment order dated 31-03-2006 was passed beyond the limitation imposed u/s 16A(3) of the Act, the ld.CGT(A) ought to have declared the said orders as null and void. 5. The ld.CGT(A) ought to have appreciated that even if the compromise deed dated 07-08-1980 was not to be considered, still there was no gift during the relevant financial year which is amenable to Gift Tax Act. 6. Even assuming that the compromise deed is a family arrangement amongst the parties, there is no gift as there bein .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e alleged appellant donor accepted that he she had no right in the property and what remained belonged only to the alleged donee and consequently there is no element of gift which is amenable to gift under the Act. 8. The ld.CGT(A) ought to have appreciated that he maxims nemo dat qui non habet (no one can give who dares not possess) and nemo dare protest quod non habet (no man can give that which he has not) were squarely applicable to the facts and circumstances of the appellant. 9. Without pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

unsel for the assessee brought to our attention that Sec.16A(3) which reads as under; Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection( 1)(and (2), an order of fresh assessment in pursuance of an order passed on or after the 1st day of April, 1975 u/s 22, section 23or section 24, setting aside or cancelling an assessment may be made at any time before the expiry of (two years) from the end of the financial year in which the order u/s 22 or 23 is received by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version