Court rules entire income from assets transferred to spouse without consideration included in transferor's income

The High Court of Kerala held that under section 64(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, the entirety of income from assets transferred to a spouse without adequate consideration should be included in the transferor's income. The Court rejected the principle of proportionality based on inadequacy of consideration, emphasizing the disregard of the transfer for income computation purposes. Ruling in favor of the Revenue, the Court directed the inclusion of the entire income derived from such assets in the transferor's income, with each party bearing their respective costs. The judgment was forwarded to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench for further action.

---

---

Issues: Interpretation of section 64(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act regarding inclusion of income from property transferred to spouse for inadequate consideration.

In this judgment by the High Court of Kerala, the issue revolved around the interpretation of section 64(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act concerning the inclusion of income from property transferred to a spouse for inadequate consideration. The Income-tax Officer had included the income derived from a house property transferred to the assessee's wife in the total income based on this provision. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld this decision, but the Tribunal disagreed, holding that only income "in the proportion of the inadequacy of the consideration" should be included. The Tribunal relied on precedents from the Bombay and Madras High Courts for this interpretation.

The High Court, however, disagreed with the Tribunal's reasoning, stating that the provision in question mandates the inclusion of the entirety of the income arising from assets transferred to a spouse without adequate consideration. The Court emphasized that despite the transfer, all income from such assets should be included in the transferor's income as if no transfer had occurred. The Court highlighted that section 64(1)(iii) does not support the principle of proportionality based on the inadequacy of consideration. Instead, it aims to disregard the transfer for income computation purposes. The Court cited decisions from the Gauhati and Calcutta High Courts to support this interpretation.

In conclusion, the High Court ruled in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee, stating that the entire income derived from assets transferred to a spouse without adequate consideration should be included in the transferor's income. The Court directed the parties to bear their respective costs in the tax referred cases and ordered the forwarding of the judgment to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench for further action.

---