GOPIKUMARI BIRLA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Tribunal has referred the following questions to this Court under S. 27(1) of the WT Act, 1957. The questions read as under :

(2.) THUS , it was provided by and under the said trust deed that the aforesaid fixed amounts shall be payable by the trustees to the beneficiaries named in the trust deed out of the income of the trust fund. It was provided that the balance of the income shall be accumulated until Mr. Ashok Birla attained the age of 18 years. It was provided by the said cl. (1) of the trust deed that the accumulated balance of the income shall be paid over to the said Ashok Birla. It was further provided in the said trust deed that the corpus of the said trust fund was to be handed over to Mr. Ashok Birla only after the death of Mr. Gajanan Birla and the assessee and not earlier. 'thus, it was directed that the corpus of the trust fund be kept intact until the death of Gajanan Birla and Gopykoer Birla (the assessee) who were entitled to receive merely the fixed monthly amounts from the said trustees, during their lifetime as aforesaid. The right of the assessee to receive the periodical amount from the trustees operated as a continuing charge on the income from the trust fund for all time to come so as to ensure payment of the fixed monthly amount to the assessee during her lifetime.

(3.) DURING the asst. yrs. 1964 65 to 1966 67, the Tribunal took the view that the said amount receivable by the assessee from the trustees under the said deed of trust was includible in the net wealth of the assessee as it was not an annuity and as it was not covered by the exemption under the above referred provision. The Tribunal delivered its judgment in respect of the appeals before it pertaining to the above referred assessment years on 27th Feb., 1971. The relevant assessment years which are the subject matter of the present reference are 1967 68 to 1972 73. It is the contention of the assessee that, in matters of this nature, the doctrine of res judicata has no application and the assessee had not pursued the matter further against the order dt. 27th Feb., 1971, as all the relevant material could not be adequately brought on record in the proceedings pertaining to earlier years. Whatever may be the reason, we shall have to consider the present reference on its own merits.