Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the entire income from the settled house properties, or only the portion payable to the settlor as beneficiary, could be included in the assessee's total income under section 16(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1922.
Analysis: The governing rule under section 16(1)(c) is that income from a settlement or revocable transfer is assessed in the hands of the settlor, but the third proviso excludes the income from the settlement in favour of another beneficiary where the settlement is not revocable for the prescribed period and the settlor derives no direct or indirect benefit from that portion. The Court applied the earlier construction of the provision and held that the first proviso does not compel inclusion of the whole income merely because a part of the income is reserved to the settlor. The later comparison with section 63 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 confirmed that the older provision did not expressly treat a reserved part of the income in the same way.
Conclusion: Only the amount actually payable to and received by the settlor could be included in his income, and the income attributable to the other beneficiaries could not be assessed in his hands.