2003 (11) TMI 276 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal revises gift valuation, acknowledges genuine family arrangement, excludes from Gift-tax Act.

Dr. KM Shah. Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Gift-Tax.

The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, revising the valuation of the taxable gift to Rs. 1,49,40,280. It acknowledged the bona fide nature of the ... Deemed Gift Issues Involved:1. Ownership of the property 'Mohan Nivas'.2. Applicability of Section 4(2) of the Gift-tax Act.3. Validity of the arbitration award and the family arrangement.4. Assessment year for the applicability of gift tax.5. Valuation of the property for gift tax purposes.Detailed Analysis:1. Ownership of the Property 'Mohan Nivas':The primary dispute revolves around whether the property known as 'Mohan Nivas' belonged to the individual assessee or to the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF). The property was purchased in the names of the assessee's two minor sons in 1954, but the funds' source was unclear. The assessee had been declaring the property in his individual wealth-tax returns, but an arbitration award in 1995 declared it as HUF property. The Tribunal upheld that the property belonged to the individual, not the HUF, based on the assessee's consistent declaration in his returns and the lack of evidence supporting the HUF claim.2. Applicability of Section 4(2) of the Gift-tax Act:Section 4(2) of the Gift-tax Act deems a gift when an individual converts his separate property into HUF property. The Tribunal found that the arbitration award, which converted the property into HUF property, triggered the provisions of Section 4(2). The assessee's argument that the property was always HUF property was rejected due to the lack of evidence and the consistent individual declaration in tax returns.3. Validity of the Arbitration Award and the Family Arrangement:The assessee argued that the arbitration award and subsequent family arrangement were bona fide and not collusive. The Tribunal, however, found the award to be pre-determined and collusive, noting that the award was accepted without challenge and the property was sold shortly after the award. The Tribunal emphasized that the award was more in the nature of a family settlement, which could have been achieved without court intervention, indicating a collusive arrangement.4. Assessment Year for the Applicability of Gift Tax:The Tribunal considered whether the gift tax should apply in the assessment year 1995-96 or 1996-97. The arbitration award was given on 30-3-1995, and the City Civil Court passed a consent decree on 18-7-1995. The Tribunal concluded that the gift tax was applicable in the assessment year 1995-96, as the award was given within that year, and the property was declared accordingly in the returns for that year.5. Valuation of the Property for Gift Tax Purposes:The Assessing Officer valued the property at market value as of 31-3-1995, resulting in a taxable gift of Rs. 3,61,98,210. The Tribunal directed that the valuation should follow Schedule II of the Gift-tax Act, adopting Schedule III of the Wealth-tax Act. The final taxable gift was recalculated to Rs. 1,49,40,280 after considering the basic exemption.Separate Judgments Delivered:The Judicial Member upheld the applicability of Section 4(2) and the valuation method but found the family arrangement collusive. The Accountant Member dissented, arguing that there was no transfer or conversion of property during the assessment year 1995-96 and that the family arrangement was bona fide. The Third Member, Vice President R.P. Garg, concurred with the Accountant Member, emphasizing the bona fide nature of the family arrangement and rejecting the applicability of Section 4(2).Conclusion:The appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal directing the valuation of the taxable gift to be revised to Rs. 1,49,40,280 and acknowledging the family arrangement's bona fide nature, thus excluding it from the purview of Section 4(2) of the Gift-tax Act.