1980 (9) TMI 2 - SC - Wealth-tax

Court rules trust fund interest not annuity under Wealth-tax Act

Commissioner of Wealth-Tax, Lucknow Versus sP. K. Banerjee (decd., By Legal Representatives)

The Supreme Court held that the interest of the assessee in the trust fund did not qualify as an annuity exempt under section 2(e)(iv) of the Wealth-tax ... Whether the interest of the assessee in the trust fund amounted to an annuity exempt under section 2(e)(iv) - judgment of the High Court is set aside and the question referred to the High Court under s. 27(1) of the Act is answered in the negative and against the assessee because power in trustees to reinvest upon redemption Right is not ' annuity ' and is taxable Issues Involved:1. Whether the interest of the assessee in the trust fund amounted to an annuity exempt under section 2(e)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Nature of Interest in the Trust Fund:The primary question referred to the court was whether the interest of the assessee in the trust fund amounted to an annuity exempt under section 2(e)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act. The assessee, under a trust deed executed by his father, was entitled to receive the net income arising from the trust fund during his lifetime. The trust deed specified that after the death of the settlor, the income would be paid to the assessee, and subsequently to other beneficiaries as outlined. The trust fund consisted of Government loan bonds or securities, and the trustee was directed to manage these funds according to the terms of the trust deed.2. Assessment Proceedings and Tribunal's Findings:During the assessment proceedings, the assessee contended that the corpus of the trust fund should not be included in his total wealth as he only had a right to receive an annuity under the trust deed. The Wealth-tax Officer (WTO) included the full market value of the trust fund in the assessee's total wealth. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal upheld this decision but directed the WTO to modify the assessments by valuing the life interest of the assessee according to recognized principles of valuation.3. High Court's Decision:The High Court of Allahabad, upon hearing the references, directed the Tribunal to submit a supplementary statement on whether the right of the assessee to receive amounts was an annuity and whether the terms precluded commutation into a lump sum. The Tribunal concluded that the asset was not an annuity. However, the High Court held that the interest of the assessee amounted to an annuity exempt under section 2(e)(iv) of the Act and answered the question in favor of the assessee.4. Supreme Court's Analysis:The Supreme Court examined the definition of 'net wealth' and 'assets' under the Wealth-tax Act. It noted that to qualify for exemption under section 2(e)(iv), it must be established that the property is an annuity and that commutation into a lump sum is precluded. The court emphasized that the right to receive the net income from the trust fund did not constitute a periodical payment of a definite sum but was subject to variation based on the income generated by the trust fund. The court referred to previous judgments, including Ahmed G. H. Ariff v. CWT and CWT v. Mrs. Arundhati Balkrishna, which distinguished between annuities and life interests based on the nature of the payments.5. Definition and Characteristics of Annuity:The court reiterated that an annuity involves a fixed or pre-determined sum payable periodically and should not be subject to variation based on the income of the trust fund. The court cited definitions from legal texts and previous judgments to support this view. It held that the right to receive an aliquot share of the net income from the trust fund did not constitute an annuity but a life interest.6. Rejection of High Court's Reasoning:The court rejected the High Court's reasoning that the income from Government securities, being definite, constituted an annuity. It emphasized that the intention of the settlor was for the assessee to receive the net income, which could vary. The court also dismissed the reliance on the decision in Duke of Norfolk, In re: Public Trustee v. IRC, as it did not support the High Court's conclusion.Conclusion:The Supreme Court concluded that the interest of the assessee in the trust fund was not an annuity exempt under section 2(e)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act. The appeals were allowed, the judgment of the High Court was set aside, and the question was answered in the negative and against the assessee. The assessee was ordered to pay the costs of the department.