Ramachandran Nair, J.

The question raised in the Gift Tax Appeal filed by the assessee is whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the value of one Maruti car and 151 sovereigns of gold given by him to his daughter at the time of marriage reduced by the exemption of Rs.30,000/- available under Section 5(1)(7) constitute a gift assessable under the Gift Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter called "the Act"). We have heard Sri.P.Balakrishnan, counsel appearing for the appellant.

2. Counsel relied on decision of this court in COMMISSIONER OF GIFT-TAX VS. V.SUNDARAM ACHARI reported in (2004) 266 ITR 681 and contended that like a Hindu father, a Muslim father also has a moral obligation to get his daughter well married and so much so, following the judgment abovereferred the above gifts given at the time of marriage do not constitute chargeable gift under Section 2(xii) of the Act. He has further pointed out that the distinction drawn by the Madras High court in COMMISSIONER OF GIFT-TAX VS. K.B.AVURUMANKUTTY reported in (2003) 264 ITR 177 between Hindu father and Muslim father is non-existent atleast in Kerala and so much so, the Tribunal was not justified in following the decision of the Madras High Court to disallow the claim.

3. On going through the above two decisions, after hearing the counsel and on going through the statutory provisions, we are unable to agree with the opinion expressed by this court and the Madras High Court in the above two decisions even though we agree with the conclusion arrived at by the Madras High court. In our view, it is the desire of every father, whether he is member of the Hindu community or Muslim community, to have his daughter married in the best manner possible and naturally people look persons for marrying their daughters who hold the same status, position etc. in the society as they have. Even though under Muslim law marriage is a contract, no one can expect a grown up girl to go and negotiate and enter into contract for marriage by herself. It is common knowledge that like member of any other community it is the father and the family members who arrange the marriage for the girl, no matter the Muslim marriage is treated as a contract. We are, therefore, unable to agree with the view expressed by the Madras High Court that since Muslim marriage is a contract, father is not obliged to give any gift at the time of marriage and so much so, gift given by Muslim father at the time of marriage of his daughter is not comparable with the gift given by a Hindu father because under Hindu law, it is the obligation of the father to maintain his daughter which includes giving her in marriage.

4. In our view, liability to tax and exemption has to be considered only with reference to statutory provisions and it is not for the court to make any law with reference to personal laws of the communities when the Act is a self-contained code. Parliament was well aware of the existence of various religious communities in the society, their social and legal obligations and they would have considered all these at the time of making the law. In fact, it is not as if the Parliament was unaware of gift being given to those getting married at the time of marriage. The exemption provided under Section 5(1)(vii) of the Act at the relevant time is as follows:

"S.5. Exemption in respect of certain gifts (1) Gift-tax shall not be charged under this Act in respect of gifts made by any person—

.........

(vii) to any relative dependent upon him for support and maintenance, on the occasion of the marriage of the relative, subject to a maximum of rupees thirty thousand in value in respect of the marriage of each such relative."

From the above it is clear that exemption contemplated is in respect of gift given by a person to any relative depending upon him for support and maintenance on the occasion of the marriage of such dependent. Obviously gift by father to daughter who is dependent upon him at the time of marria