2009 (2) TMI 52

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ee? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding the reopening of the assessment under S.17(1)(a)? 3.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding and approving the directions of the CWT (A) in the context of qualification of the value of the right referred to in question No.1 above?" Though three questions have been referred, the answer really will depend on answering the first question. 2. A few facts may be stated. The assessee is Behram K. Dubash. His grand father Ardeshir Behram Dubash had created a trust on 2^nd May, 1928. A supplementary deed was executed on 2^nd August, 1945 which is the document which is really relevant fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....son Ardeshir and if Ardeshir be also not alive then to the eldest male child of the said Bomanji Ardeshir Dubash as may then be alive." 4. On behalf of the assessee the learned Counsel submits that firstly Clause 4 itself was not operational, considering that Boman Ardeshir Dubash was alive as noted by the Tribunal on the date of the valuation. Independently it is pointed out that mere right to purchase may be for an ascertained price is not property or interest in property and, therefore, could not have been added to the net wealth of the assessee. 5. We have heard the learned Counsel. In our opinion as far as the first contention is concerned, really speaking it is only on the death of Boman Ardeshir Dubash would the relevant part o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er directing the landlord to sell the land to him for a price to be fixed by it, under S.9 of the principal Act is a right to property. The law of India does not recognize equitable estates. No authority has been cited in support of the contention that a statutory right to purchase land is, or confers, an interest or a right in property. The fact that the right is created not by contract but by a statute cannot made a difference in the content or the incidents of the right: that depends upon the nature and the scope of the right conferred. The right conferred is a right to purchase land. If such a right conferred under a contract is not a right of property, the fact that such a right stems from a statute cannot obviously expand its content ....