Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. The matter was agitated by the assessee before the Tribunal. Following the order of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sushilaben A. Mafatlal v. WTO, the Tribunal rejected the assessee's claim for exclusion of the amounts deposited under the Compulsory Deposit Scheme from her net wealth.

5. The question is whether the repayment of compulsory deposit may be treated as an annuity for the purpose of Section 2(e) of the Wealth-tax Act. Dr. Pal, the learned advocate for the assessee, has contended that Section 2(e) lays down that an annuity is not an asset within the meaning of the aforesaid provision; the expression "annuity" has not been defined in the Act; in the absence of any such statutory definition, one has to consider the said expression as understood in its ordinary meaning. "Annuity" has been defined in the Shorter Oxford Dictionary to mean, inter alia, "an investment of money, entitling the investor to receive a series of equal annual payments, made up of both principal and interest". It is his contention that the Supreme Court in Nawab Sir Mir Osman Ali Khan v. CWT [1986] 162 ITR 888, 902, referred to and relied upon the above definition of "annuity" given in the Oxford Dictionary. According to the Supreme Court, "an annuity is a certain sum of money payable yearly either as a personal obligation of the grantor or out of property". The hallmark of an annuity, is (1) it is money; (2) paid annually; and (3) in fixed sum. In the case of an annuity under a will, it may be also a charge personally on the grantor. Dr. Pal has also referred to a decision of the Supreme Court in CWT v. P.K. Banerjee [1980] 125 ITR 641. Relying on the said decision of the Supreme Court, Dr. Pal contends that, in order to constitute an annuity, the payment to be made periodically should be a fixed or pre-determined one, and it should not be liable to any variation depending upon any ground relating to the general income of the fund or estate which is charged for such payment. He has drawn our attention to the relevant provisions of the Compulsory Deposit Scheme (Income-tax Payers) Act, 1974. Section 8 of the Compulsory Deposit Scheme (Income-tax Payers) Act, 1974, lays down that the amount of compulsory deposit made by or recovered from a depositor in any financial year shall be repayable in five equal annual instalments commencing from the expiry of two years from the end of that financial year, together with the interest due on the whole or, as the case may be, part of the amount of the compulsory deposit which has remained unpaid. Section 7 provides that every compulsory deposit made by or recovered from a depositor shall carry simple interest at a rate equal to the bank deposit rate. Therefore, so far as the rate of interest is concerned, this is also a fixed one, viz., at the bank rate of interest such interest is to be paid.