SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B. P. JEEVAN REDDY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.
Jyotendrasinhji, Appellant
Versus
S. I. Tripathi and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal Nos. 1301-07 of 1991 with C.A. Nos. 1288-1300 of 1991 and I.A. Nos. (15-21) of 1991
Decided on 2-4-1993.
Bihar Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1948 - Section 166 and 13 - Income-tax Act, 1961 - Demand for tax - Assessability of income from five foreign trusts - Transfer convey and pay off property - Executed three deeds of settlements three settlements executed in U.S. are in identical terms - Similarly two settlements executed in U.K. are similar - Two sets of settlements however differ from each other in certain particulars though both sets are meant for benefit of settlor and members of his family – Court may refer to relevant clauses in settlements executed in U.S. in first instance - U.S. settlements - National City Bank New York is constituted the sole trustee - Trust is created for benefit of grantor/settlor his wife and children and their spouses (referred to as family members) and their descendants - Trustee is empowered to collect income from the trust properties and to apply same among family members and /or their descendants in such manner as he thinks appropriate - He is also authorized to terminate trusts for any reason (including tax reasons) and to transfer convey and pay off property held thereunder to any person or persons then eligible to receive income of trusts - On such termination entire assets in hands of trustee are to be paid over to then Maharaja (Ruler) or to his living male descendants in equal shares per stirpes – Held, It is significant to notice ground of non-taxability put forward in said letter - Appellant did not say that he did not receive income - All he said was since it is a discretionary trust its income is not taxable in his hands - If he had not received income he would have put forward that fact in forefront - But he did not - Similarly in return relating to a note was appended by appellant to following effect Late has created trusts in U.K - Assesses has been informed that income falling in hands of assesses pounds - This is therefore shown as income in his return (Emphasis added) - It is true that appellant had argued before Commission that settlor as well as himself had included said income in their returns out of ignorance and on the basis of wrong legal advice but said explanation has not been accepted by Commission and court must go by the findings of Commission - It is not brought to our notice that during any of years concerned did appellant ever say that he did not receive income from these trusts - If so question of law urged is of mere academic interest and need not be dealt with by us - Section 5 of Act is wide enough to bring all such income to tax - Appeals dismissed.
JUDGMENT
B. P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.:—These appeals are preferred against the orders of the Settlement Commission dated March 31, 1989 in pursuance of the offers of settlement made by the appellant. Civil Appeals 1301-07 of 1991 relate to the assessment years 1964-65 to 1970-71 while Civil Appeals 1288-1300 of 1991 relate to the assessment years 1970-71 to 1982-83. Under its orders, the Settlement Commission computed the taxable income of the appellants father (who died on August 22, 1969) and of the appellant for the aforesaid assessment years and gave certain directions, applying which the I.T.O. was directed to compute the total income for each of the said assessment years and raise demand for the tax due. The main issue in all these matters is the assessability of income from five foreign trusts created by the appellants father, Sri Vikramsinhjl.
2. Sri Vikramsinhji, Ex-ruler of Gondal executed three deeds of settlements (trusts deeds) in the United States of America on December 19, 1963 and two deeds in the United Kingdom on January 1, 1964. The three settlements executed in U.S. are in identical terms. Similarly, the two settlements, executed in U.K. are similar. The two sets of settlements, however, differ from each other in certain pariculars, though both the sets are meant for the benefit of the settlor and the members of his family. We may refer to the relevant clauses in the settlements executed in U.S. in the first instance.
3. Under the U.S. settlements,. The National City Bank, New York is constituted the sole trustee. The trust is created for the benefit of the grantor/settlor, his wife and children and their spouses (referred to as family members) and their descendants. The trustee is empowered to collect the income from the trust properties and to apply the same among the family members and /or their descendants in such manner as he thinks appropriate. He is also authorised to terminate the trusts for any reason (including tax reasons) and to transfer, convey and pay off the property held thereunder to any person or persons then eligible to receive the income of the trusts. On such termination, the entire assets in the hands of the trustee are to be paid over to the then Maharaja (Ruler) or to his living male descendants in equal shares per stirpes. The clause which is relevant herein, which according to the Revenue, makes the trusts revocable ones - we may refer to it as para 1 (2) for the sake of convenience - reads thus:
"Anything hereinabove to the contrary notwithstanding, at any time and from time to time the Trustee shall transfer, convey and pay over any portion of the income of the trust fund and any portion or all of the principal held in trust to or to the use of such one or more members of a class composed of the Grantor, the wife or widow of the Grantor, the children of the Grantor living from time to time, the spouse of any child of the Grantor then living or deceased (hereinafter referred to as the "Family Members"), and the descendants of the Family Members living from time to time, in such amounts, shares and proportions, either absolute or in trust, and upon such terms and conditions (including the grant of a further low to appoint) as the Trustee and a Maharaja who shall have attained the age of eighteen (18 years) shall at any time and from time to time appoint and direct in a written instrument in amounts, absolutely conditions power which refers to and specifically exercises this power and which is duly executed by the Maharaja and by the Trustee then acting hereunder. The foregoing power to appoint may be released in whole or in part by the Maharaja or by the Trustee or by both at any time by one or more written instruments duly executed by the Maharaja or by the Trustee or by both and delivered to the Trustee then acting hereunder, provided, however, that if either the Maharaja or the Trustee, but not both of them, shall release such power, then the party not so releasing shall continue to hav
Mahanth Ram Swaroop Das v. State of Bihar
distinguished : Sevantilal Maneklal Sheth v. Commissioner of Income Tax
approved : Tarunendra Nath Tagore v. Commissioner of Income Tax
referred to : Commissioner of Income Tax v. Ratilal Nathalal
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.