Case Details

Citation(s)
1989 SLG 2208 1989 SLD 2208 (1989) 176 ITR 251
Kerala High Court

K. SUKUMARAN, J.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

T.V. Alexander

v.

Gift-TAX Officer

Law:

Section:

Section 29 of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 - Gift-tax - Recovery of - Assessee gifted a property to petitioner - GTO determined tax and completed assessment - Whether as assessee failed to deposit tax due on aforesaid gift, for more than 15 years, department was justified in invoking provisions of section 29 for attachment of aforesaid property gifted to petitioner - Held, yes FACTS The assessee gifted a property to the petitioner. The GTO completed the assessment and determined the tax. Since the assessee had not paid the aforesaid tax, recovery proceedings were initiated, which took more than 15 years, and finally provisions of section 29 were invoked, for attachment and sale of the property gifted to the petitioner. On writ: HELD In the instant case, the petitioner did not choose to put forward his contentions before the GTO, though he had indicated some of the complaints before the TRO The authority before whom his grievances were highlighted did consider the same but found them untenable and unacceptable. The result was a letter intimating the petitioner about the more serious action proposed against him in relation to the recovery, namely, by way of attachment of the property. There were circumstances which would indicate the supreme undesirability of article 226 being invoked in favour of the petitioner. There was an indication that the petitioner himself had agreed to pay the balance tax, if he was given little time. Of course, that was a matter which the GTO had to consider. It might not be ordinarily assumed that the GTO would incorporate a false statement with a view to harass and harm the petitioner. The petition was, therefore, dismissed. Raju Abraham for the Petitioner. P.K.R. Menon for the Respondent. JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner is a donee under a gift, Exhibit P-1, executed way back on 6-3-1972. He must consider himself fortunate that he has been the owner of a substantial item of property and could have its enjoyment without any mone-tary investment from his private funds. When the transaction is exigible to gift-tax, naturally, tax has to be paid. The assessee is the donor. An assessment was made. Tax was determined. But it was not paid. The…
πŸ”’
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492