9911796707
TMI Blog1964 (10) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was legal ? " The facts and circumstances referred to are set out in the statement of the case by the Appellate Tribunal and are as follows. One Raja Profulla Nath Tagore died on July 2, 1938, leaving an elaborate will dated March 14, 1927, by which certain legacies were left to specified persons and institutions, the residue being given to five sons. The residue was disposed of thus by clause 81 of the will : " Save and except the legacies that I have provided for in this my present will and save my garden house at Allambazar Tagore Villa together with articles of furniture I give to my sons all my remaining movable and immovable properties that will be left and also the movable and immovable properties where to my right will accrue in future. Subject to the management and payment of these several trusts (Debutter, etc.) and the legacies that I have created or I have directed the creation thereof in this will my sons shall continue to hold and enjoy all the said movable and immovable properties. " Clause 10 of the said will provided for the payment of the legacies thus : " The legacies fixed in this my present will shall have to be paid in full within 15 years of my death ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its Tax and Asit Kiumar Ghose v. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, he held that the " levy of tax on the separate individual incomes of the beneficiaries can be made only when the administration of the estate has been completed, and the residue of the estate has been ascertained. " It was conceded before him that the administration of the estate was not completed till the end of the accounting year (1950-51). The Appellate Tribunal also rejected the contention. It held that : " It is the condition of the application of this section (section 41) that the Administrator-General of West Bengal shall receive the income on behalf of the beneficiaries. We have held that having regard to section 211 of the Indian Succession Act the Admnistrator-General of West Bengal receives it as legal representative of the deceased person and not on behalf of the beneficiaries. The latter he can do only if the administration of the estate is complete or if there are specific directions to that effect. The proviso goes further and enacts that when such income is not specifically receivable on behalf of one person or where the individual share of the person on whose behalf it was receivable is in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4 of the Act. In the alternative, he argued that the share of the sons were indeterminate. As we are inclined to accept the first submission of the learned Attorney-General, we need not express any opinion on the question whether the shares of the five sons were indeterminate or not, within the proviso to section 41. Section 41 reads thus : " 41. Court of Wards, etc.--- (i) In the case of income, profits or gains chargeable under this Act which the Courts of Wards, the Administrators General, the Official Trustees or any receiver or manager (including any person whatever his designation who in fact manages property on behalf of another) appointed by or under any order of a court, or any trustee or trustees appointed under a trust declared by a duly executed instrument in writing whether testamentary or otherwise including the trustee or trustees under any wakf deed which is valid under the Mussalman Wakf Validating Act, 1913 (6 of 1913), are entitled to receive on behalf of any person, the tax shall be levied upon and recoverable from such Court of Wards, Administrator-General, Official Trustee, receiver or manager or trustee or trustees, in the like manner and to the same amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... residue of his estate to Dr. Barnado's Homes National Incorporated Association. The testator's nextof-kin contested the will and the proceedings were compromised by the Association making over to the next-of-kin one-third of the residuary estate. The proceedings delayed the division of the residuary estate, and the investments constituting or representing the same remained under the control of the executors until May, 1961, between which date and December, 1916, two-thirds of the investments were transferred to the Association and one-third to the testator's next-of-kin. The income arising from the investments was received under deduction of income tax and the total amount of tax deducted from such income during the period between the date of the testator's death and the dates of transfer by the executors amounted to pounds 498 os. 11d. The association applied, under section 105 of the Income Tax Act, 1842, to the Special Commissioners of Income Tax for repayment of two-thirds of that sum, viz., pound 332 Os. 7d., as being income tax on income payable to the Association and applicable, and in fact applied, by it solely for charitable purposes. The application being unsuccessful, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by his executors and the net residue ascertained, the residuary legatee is entitled to have the residue as so ascertained, with any accrued income transferred and paid to him ; but until that time he has no property in any specific investment forming part of the estate or in the income from any such investment, and both corpus and income are the property of the executors and are applicable by them as a mixed fund for the purposes of administration. This was fully explained in Lord Sudeley v. Attorney-General." Subsequent cases such as the Marie Celeste Samaritan Society of the London Hospital v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue and Corbett v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue have taken the same view. In the latter case, the decision in Dr. Barnado's case, was held to have laid down " a general proposition applicable to all cases of residue which is being ascertained and which cannot be ascertained until the administration is complete. " Mr. Sastri relied on In re Cunliffe-Owen : Mountain v. Inland Revenue Commissioners, but, in our opinion, the Court of Appeal has not taken any different view. The Court of Appeal was concerned with the interpretation of section 27(1),of the Fina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
