COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS SMT. USHABEN TRUST
1993 P T D 665
[190 ITR 485]
[Bombay High Court (India)]
Before Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar and T.D. Sugla, JJ
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
versus
SMT. USHABEN TRUST
Wealth Tax Reference No.70 of 1976, decided on 15/06/1990.
Wealth tax--
---- Assessment---Trust---Assessment of individual beneficiaries---Trust cannot be assessed thereafter.
Held, that it was not open to the Wealth Tax Officer to assess the trust notwithstanding the fact that assessments in the individual hands of the beneficiaries had already been made.
Trustees of Putlibai R.F. Mulla Trust v. CWT (1967) 66 ITR 653 (Bom.) fol.
CWT v. Trustees or H.E.H. Nizam's Family (Remainder Wealth) Trust (1977) 108 ITR 555 (SC) ref.
G.S. Jetley with Mrs. Manjula Singh and K.C. Sidhwa for the Commissioner.
Dilip Dwarkadas with S.H. Paradkar instructed by M.K. Ambalal & Co. for the assessee.
JUDGMENT
T.D. SUGLA, J.---This is a reference at the instance of the Department. The proceedings relate to the assessment of the assessee-trust for the assessment year 1969-70. It was stated by the assessee before the Wealth Tax Officer that the beneficiaries had already been assessed in respect of their interest in the trust property. However, the Wealth Tax Officer completed the assessment on the trust properties treating it as an individual. The assessment was set aside by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Following its order for the assessment year 1968-69, the Tribunal confirmed the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal has referred to this Court the following question of law for opinion:
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it was open to the Wealth Tax Officer to assess the trust, notwithstanding the fact that assessments in the individual hands of the beneficiaries had already been made?"
Shri Jetley, learned counsel for the Department, has fairly stated that the issue involved herein is covered by this Court's judgment in the case of Trustees of Putlibai R.F. Mulla Trust v. CWT (1967) 66 ITR 653. However, the issue he stated, was pending before the Supreme Court Shri Dastur, learned counsel for the respondent, stated that the Bombay High Court's decision (1967) 66 ITR 653 has been approved by the Supreme Court in the case of CWT v. Trustees of H.E.H. Nizam's Family (Remainder Wealth) Trust (1977) 108 ITR 555, 599. Accordingly, we answer the question in the negative in favour of the assessee.
No orders as to costs.
M.BA./2120/T ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Question answered.