1985 (1) TMI 113

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....talled to Rs. 84,330. The GTO treated the transactions as gift from the assessee to his wife and after allowing exemption of Rs. 50,000 under s. 5(1) (viii) of the GT Act, 1958 he brought the balance of Rs. 34,330. to gift-tax by his order dt. 15th march, 1982. According toe the GTO, the assessee, during the previous year, on 2nd April, 1976, relevant to the asst. yr. 1977-78, renewed the deposit of Rs. 25,000 (which was originally made by the assessee in his own name on 2nd April, 1974) in the name of his wife Smt. L. Saraswathy Amma. He treated this as a gift by the assessee to his wife and brought it to tax by his order dt. 15th March, 1982. 3. Aggrieved by the orders of the GTO the assessee preferred appeals to the first appellate au....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ive were to the following effect. The fact that the assessee showed those fixed deposits in his WT returns and the assessment by the WTO treating the said deposits as the assessee's wealth are not relevant to the issue for gift-tax purposes. There was express acceptance on the part of the assessee's wife of the gifts made by the assessee when she made applications for making fixed deposits in the bank. The theory of convenience cannot be accepted because certain later deposits made by the assessee were in the joint names of the assessee to his wife. The assessee could have made the deposits under appeal in the joint names if he really meant convenience. He could not have made these deposits under appeal in the single name of his wife. 6.....