1978 (7) TMI 99

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tax Act, 1957, as amended by the Wealth-tax (Amendment) Act, 1964, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 1,56,271, being the value of 1,520 shares in Sandur Manganese & Iron Ore Ltd., could not be included in the net wealth of the assessee under section 4(1)(a)(iii) of the Wealth-tax Act for the assessment year 1965-66 ? " His Highness Yeshwant Rao Ghorpade (hereinafter referred to as " the assessee ") held certain shares in Sandur Manganese and Iron Ore Ltd., on March 31, 1957. On August 24, 1957, he created two trusts, namely, (i) Shri Yeshwant Rao Maharaj Charitable Trust, Sandur (hereinafter referred to as the " charitable trust "), and (ii) Sandur Ruler's Family (Second) Trust (hereinafter transferred to as th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Trust. It is only as and when any of them attains majority, the trustees begin to hold the specified property for his or her benefit. This part of the decision of the Supreme Court continues to bind us even now notwithstanding the amendment of section 4(1)(a)(iii) of the Act in 1964, to which we shall refer presently, and we are precluded from going behind it. We may add here that although reference was made to the above-said amendment in the course of the decision, its effect on the present case was not considered. The relevant part of section 4(1)(a)(iii) of the Act, prior to its amendment by the Wealth-tax (Amendment) Act, 1964 (46 of 1964), stood as follows : " 4. (1) In computing the net wealth of an individual there shall be inc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... computation of his wealth, The Tribunal has affirmed the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax. Hence this reference at the instance of the department. We are of the view that on the facts and in the circumstances of this case there is no material difference at all between the position which was prevailing prior to the amendment and the position prevailing after the amendment. Even after the amendment in order that the property transferred by the assessee otherwise than for adequate consideration to any person or association of persons can be included in the computation of his wealth, it should have been held by the transferee for the immediate or deferred benefit of any of the persons mentioned in clause (iii) ....