1983 (9) TMI 164

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n of jewels to daughter Meenakshi on the occasion of marriage 58,691 ---------------- 1,07,900 ---------------- It is not clear whether it was ancestral jewellery that was presented or jewellery purchased for the occasion and given. However, the case seems to fall under the latter category because the assessee claimed it as expenditure. The GTO of course excluded the expenditure of Rs. 49,209 from gift-tax. But he overruled the contention of the assessee that presentation of jewellery is only an expenditure connected with marriage and that the entire amount of Rs. 1,07,900 was spent for the purpose of celebrating the marriage of his daughter in order to discharge his legal and moral obligation. It was argued before the AAC that the dau....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ried daughter to have a reasonable portion of income or corpus of the joint family property utilised for meeting her marriage expenses. In this sense, a settlement in her favour of joint family property as a marriage provision can hardly be regarded as a gift since such a provision is compulsive under the Hindu law and by no means voluntary in the proper sense of the term. Again, since the karta, when he settles the property on the unmarried daughter, by the same token, discharges the obligation of the joint family estate to meet the expenses of marriage, the transaction cannot be regarded as one without consideration in money or money's worth. Looked at from any angle, settlements of this kind cannot be brought within the mischief of the G....