https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22225 The court held that the trust was not for the benefit of known and determinate individuals as required by section 164(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the Income-tax Officer's assessment at the maximum marginal rate was upheld, as the prospective wife, although specified as the beneficiary, was not identifiable at the time of trust creation. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, answering the referred question of law in the negative. The judgment was delivered unanimously by both judges, with no order as to costs. en-us Fri, 01 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Dec 2009 12:01:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22225 The court held that the trust was not for the benefit of known and determinate individuals as required by section 164(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the Income-tax Officer's assessment at the maximum marginal rate was upheld, as the prospective wife, although specified as the beneficiary, was not identifiable at the time of trust creation. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, answering the referred question of law in the negative. The judgment was delivered unanimously by both judges, with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 01 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22225