9911796707
TMI Blog1967 (9) TMI 5X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 2(xxiv)(d) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 ?" Section 2(xii) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, defines the expression "gift". According to that definition "gift" means "the transfer by one person to another of any existing movable or immovable property made voluntarily and without consideration in money or money's worth, and includes the transfer of any property deemed to be a gift under section 4". Section 4 deals with certain transfers which have to be deemed to be gifts for the purposes of the Act. We are not concerned with that section in this case. Section 2(xxiv) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, defines the expression "transfer of property". According to sub-clause (d) of that section, that expression will include "any transaction entered into by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, and of the Mysore High Court in Smt. Laxmibai Narayana Rao Nerlekar v. Commissioner of Gift-tax, under the Gift-tax Act, 1958, itself, also do not arise for consideration and are not considered in this judgment. The first question for determination is whether the act of the assessee in throwing his self-acquisitions into the hotchpot of his joint family can be considered to be a "transaction" entered into by him. A transaction entered into by a person, in our opinion, should be an act which is bilateral or multilateral in character, and not a mere unilateral action which is all that occurs when a coparcener throws his self-acquisitions into the hotchpot of his joint family. In Mallesappa v. M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said decision : " A transaction, as the derivation denotes, is something which has been concluded between persons by a cross of reciprocal action as it were . . . . " Section 4(f) of the Australian Gift Duty Assessment Act, 1941-42, provides that the expression "disposition of property" includes "any transaction entered into by any person with intent thereby to diminish, directly or indirectly, the value of his own property and to increase the value of the property of any other person." In Grimwade v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation, Lathem C. J. and Webb J. said : " A transaction by a person must be a transaction with some other person. "; and that to interpret the words "enter into a transaction" as if they had the same meaning as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oes not arise for consideration. In the light of our conclusion that the word "transaction" spells an act, which is bilateral or multilateral in character, and that the conduct of the assessee in throwing his self-acquisitions into the hotchpot of his joint family was nothing else or other than a unilateral act on his part. The question referred has to be answered in the negative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the department. We do so ; but in the circumstances of the case without any order as to costs. A copy of this judgment under the seal of the High Court and the signature of the Registrar will be sent to the Appellate Tribunal as required by sub-section (6) of section 26 of the Gift-tax Act, 1958. Question answered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
