TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1979 (10) TMI 118
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inor daughters by first wife, who expired about 5 years before the date of the alleged gift, which is 15th March, 1973. Then the donor married after the death of the first wife and before the date of the alleged gift a second wife. Thereafter he executed four separate documents of transfer of immovable property in favour of the four minor daughters, all minors represented by their maternal grand f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed as a transfer for consideration and cannot be treated as gift. So he cancelled the assessment. Hence this appeal by Department. The cross objection is only to support the impugned appellate order. 2. We are of the view that the AAC is not right because this is a Madras case where the law is different from the one he followed. The AAC followed an AP High Court judgment in 105 ITR 849. If this c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deed that it is meant as a provision to the minors clearly show that it is a document executed for the purpose of providing the maintenance of the minor children. So we are proceeding on that basis. But this provision may, be valuable consideration as understood in the law of contracts. But not consideration in the money or monies worth. The Madras High Court in MSM Ratnaswamy Nadar vs. CIT has he....