Gift-tax principles: unilateral property transfer to children is a gift, while education exemption needs specific proof.

A unilateral settlement deed transferring self-acquired property to children without consideration in money or money's worth is treated as a gift, not a family arrangement, because a family arrangement requires a mutual agreement intended to preserve peace and avoid disputes. The article also states that exemption for a gift made for a child's education applies only when the assessee proves that specific purpose through the deed or other reliable evidence, and a general reference to children or dependants is insufficient. On that reasoning, the transfer was held exigible to gift-tax and the education-based exemption was denied.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the settlement deed executed by the assessee in favour of his children was a family arrangement outside the scope of gift-tax or a taxable gift under the Gift-tax Act. (ii) Whether the gift of the house in favour of the assessee's minor son was exempt under the provision relating to gifts for education of children.

Issue (i): Whether the settlement deed executed by the assessee in favour of his children was a family arrangement outside the scope of gift-tax or a taxable gift under the Gift-tax Act.

Analysis: A family arrangement requires an agreement or arrangement amongst family members intended to avoid disputes and maintain peace and harmony. A unilateral settlement by one member, transferring his self-acquired properties in favour of his children, does not satisfy that essential character. The deed here disclosed a transfer made voluntarily out of love and affection, with no consideration in money or money's worth, and the beneficiaries were not parties to any mutual arrangement. Such a transaction falls within the definition of gift.

Conclusion: The settlement was a taxable gift and not a family arrangement.

Issue (ii): Whether the gift of the house in favour of the assessee's minor son was exempt under the provision relating to gifts for education of children.

Analysis: The exemption was conditional and the burden lay on the assessee to establish that the gift was made for the education of the child and was reasonable in the circumstances. The deed contained no specific recital that the house was gifted for education, and the general preambular reference to children and dependants was insufficient. No independent evidence supported the plea, and the claim was not substantiated before the Gift-tax Officer or the appellate authorities.

Conclusion: The assessee was not entitled to the exemption.

Final Conclusion: The reference was decided against the assessee, and the gift was held exigible to gift-tax.

Ratio Decidendi: A unilateral transfer by a person of his property to his children without consideration in money or money's worth is a gift and not a family arrangement; exemption for a gift said to be for a child's education is available only when the assessee proves that specific purpose on the facts and in the deed or by other reliable evidence.

---