COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. MAGANNATHI AMBA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this reference under s. 26(1) of the GT Act, 1958 ("the Act"), the Tribunal, Bangalore Division, Bangalore ("the Tribunal"), at the instance of the Revenue, has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this Court :

(2.) THE assessee and her husband, M. Vasudeva Rao, who were the owners of certain immovable properties situated in the City of Bangalore settled them in favour of Sri M. Ramachandra Rao and Smt. R. Rajani, their son and daughter, respectively, under a registered settlement deed dt. 21st Sept., 1972. In the original settlement deed drawn up and presented for registration before the Sub-Registrar, it appears there was a condition stipulating the payment annuity to the assessee and her husband which was, however, deleted on an objection taken by the Sub-Registrar to the same and that deed was registered without incorporating that clause. On the very next day of the registration of the said document, the son and daughter of the assessee executed an agreement (Annexure B) undertaking to pay an annuity to the assessee and her husband as originally stipulating in the settlement deed.

(3.) SRI T.V. SRInivas, learned counsel appearing for the assessee, contends that the settlement deed and the agreement had to be read as one document and the direction made by the Tribunal was legal. In support of his contention, SRI SRInivas strongly relied on the ruling of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in G.V. Krishna Rao vs. First Addl. ITO (1968) 70 ITR 812 (AP) : TC35R.132 followed by the Rajasthan High Court in Sirehmal Nawalkha vs. CIT (1985) 47 CTR (Raj) 182 : (1985) 156 ITR 714 (Raj) : TC35R.158.