Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(b) To pay and discharge out of the income of the shares specified in the schedule here under written all expenses and charges for collecting and recovering the income of the trust fund and the remuneration of the trustees payable under these presents and all other costs, charges, expenses and outgoings relating to the safe custody, preservation and expenses and outgoing relating to the safe custody preservation and upkeep of the trust fund and relating to the trust and the administration thereof provided, however, that if and so far as the income of the shares specified in the schedule hereunder written be at any time not sufficient to meet any of the said costs, charges, expenses and outgoings and the remuneration of the trustees payable under these presents, then the trustees shall be at liberty to meet the same out of the corpus of the said shares and if and when the corpus of the said shares shall be exhausted to meet any of the said costs, charges, expenses and outgoings and the remuneration of the trustees out of the income of the remaining trust fund comprised in this trust.

Clause 17. - IT IS HEREBY FURTHER EXPRESSLY AGREED AND DECLARED that each of the trustees shall be entitled to charge remuneration and be remunerated for rendering service as a trustees of these presents out of the income of the trust fund and the trustees shall pay such remuneration to each of the trustees as may be fixed by them by an unanimous resolution is that behalf from time to time PROVIDED THAT the amount of such remuneration payable to any one trustee for services rendered during any one year shall not exceed the sum of Rs. 2,000 (Rupees two thousand)...."

8. Under clause 10, the trustees were entitled to invest the corpus of the trust fund in any of the securities or purchase any immovable property in their discretion. They were also entitled to sell, exchange, transfer and assign any property comprised in the trust fund. But all the securities or properties comprising the trust fund were to be allowed to remain in the single name of the settlor. Clause 11 empower the trustees to have separate trust deeds made and executed in respect of any one or more of the said twenty-five equal units of the corpus of the trust fund. Clause 12 deals with the voting pattern. It says that in all matters wherein the trustees have a discretionary power, the decision shall be taken by a majority of the trustees for the time being and if the trustees are equally divided, the matter shall be referred to the settlor during his lifetime and after his death, to the seniormost trustee in age. Clause 17 says that each of the trustees shall be entitled to charge remuneration for rendering service as a trustee and the remuneration shall not exceed Rs. 2,000 during any one year. The settlor himself was one of the trustees.

19. The question to be considered in the present case is, when did the property pass under section 5 of the Estate Duty Act ? In the case of ever person dying after the commencement of the Act, except as otherwise provided expressly, there shall be levied and paid upon the principal value ascertained of all property, settled or not settled, which passes on the death of such a person, a duty called "estate duty" at the rates fixed in occordance with section 35. The expression "property" is defined in section 2(15) as inclusive of "any interest in property, movable or immovable, the proceeds of sale thereof and money or investment for the time being representing the proceeds of sale and also includes any property converted from one species into another by any method" Section 2(16) defines "property passing on death" as inclusive of property passing either immediately on the death or after any interval, either certainly or contingently, and either originally or by way of substitutive limitation, and, "on the death" includes "at a period ascertainable only by reference to the death." Therefore, with reference to the death of the settlor, it must be ascertained whether any property passed to the beneficiaries. On the terms of the settlement deed, it cannot be said that the discretion vested in the settlor came to an end with his death and, therefore, there was any passing of property. The descretion vested in the settlor under the deed of settlement was only to administer the property in a manner conducive to improving the value of the corpus. The accumulations from the trust did not depend upon the discretion of the settlor in the sense that he could dispense with those accumulations for a purpose other than for the benefit of the trust. The settlor had no beneficial interest in the trust. It is true that by clause 17, remuneration not in excess of Rs. 2,000 per annum was contemplated for each of the trustees for the services rendered by them as trustees. But this was never given effect to. By a document dated May 18, 1956, the Nizam and other trustees relinquished their remuneration. Based on clause 17, it cannot be said that there was any beneficial interest in the trust for the settlor. Therefore, on the death of the settlor, there is no warrant for the conclusion that any property passed to the beneficiaries.