Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.25 seconds)The Wealth-Tax Act, 1957
Section 21 in The Wealth-Tax Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Wealth-Tax, Gujarat ... vs Ashokkumar Ramanlal on 5 November, 1965
7. The question then arises whether the gift of an interest in the corpus to the assessee under the trust deeds is contingent on her attaining a specified age or it is vested in interest in the assessee, possession or enjoyment alone being postponed. What is the nature and quality of the interest of the assessee in the corpus : Is it a vested interest or contingent interest ? Now, in cases of this kind where the question is as to whether an interest granted under a settlement or a will is vested or continent, there are two rules of construction which have to be kept in mind. one rule is and that is a well-settled rule for the guidance of courts is construing the settlement or will, that the interest is to be held to be vested unless a condition precedent to the vesting is expressed with reasonable clearness. The rule is that the court must always lean in favour of vesting. See Bickersteth v. Shanu, Rajes Kanta Roy v. Smt. Shanti Devi and Commissioner of Wealth-tax v. Ashokkumar Ramanlal. The other rule which is an equally cogent rule is that the intention of the author of the instrument must be gathered from a comprehensive view of all the terms of the instrument. The instrument must be read as a whole : no one part should be construed in isolation. With these preliminary observations we may now proceed to examine the relevant clauses of the trust deeds.
Section 4 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Section 113 in The Indian Succession Act, 1925 [Entire Act]
Ma Yait vs The Official Assignee on 28 October, 1929
6. The first two questions raise the issue as to what is the nature and quality of the interest of the assessment in the corpus under the trust deeds. Now one thing is clear that whatever be the nature and quality of such interest, it is not spes successionis. A spes successions is a bare or naked possibility such as the chance of a relation obtaining a legacy on the death of kinsman or any other possibility of a like nature which must be distinguished from a possibility coupled with interest. Where interest in corpus is given to a donee under a settlement and such interest is contingent on the happening of an uncertain event, the donee acquires a contigent interest in the corpus which becomes vested on the happening of the uncertain event and such contingent interest, though dependent on a possibility for its vesting, is very much different from a spes successionis. It is a form of property which is assemble or transferable and on which money can be raised unlike spes successionis which is non-transferable by reason of section 6(a) of the Transfer of Property Act. This distinction between the two legal concepts is clear and well-defined and it has been recognised in several judicial decisions. We may mention only two of them : Ma Yait v. Official Assignee and Commissioner of Wealth-tax v. Ashokkumar Ramanlal. It is, therefore, clear that even if the gift of the corpus to the assessee were regarded as contingent on her attaining a specified age as held by the Tribunal, the interest of the assessee in the corpus cannot be held to be spes successionis and therefore without value.