COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX Vs. MAHARAJA BHAGWAT SINGH LATE H H

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Revenue, by this application under Section 26(3) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, has prayed that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, may be directed to refer the following question of law for the opinion of this court :

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that the deceased H. H. Maha-rana Bhagwat Singhji of Mewar (now represented through his son and legal heir M. K. Arvind Kumar Singhji), in response to the notice under Section 16 of the Gift-tax Act issued by the Gift-tax Officer, District B-Ward, Udaipur, filed a nil return under protest. The Gift-tax Officer also issued a notice under Section 15(2) of the Act to the assessee for the assessment year 1969-70 and in pursuance of which the authorised representative of the assessee attended the proceedings. The assessee was required to file reasons as to why gift of Rs. 2,50,000 to M. K. Arvind Kumar Singhji; Rs. 50,000 to Smt. Nirupamma Kumariji and Rs. 50,000 to Smt. Raghuraj Kumariji made by the assessee may not be taxed. The assessee was also required to file reasons why the gift be not calculated for sale of 1/4th share of Daisylea House on the basis of the valuation adopted by the Government Valuer at Bombay. The assessee filed a reply and contended that the amount paid to these persons including others, were paid from the privy purse for the maintenance of the members of the royal family.

(3.) AGGRIEVED with the order dated November 13, 1991, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, affirming the order passed by the Commissioner of Gift-tax (Appeals), cancelling the penalty, the Revenue moved an application under Section 26(1) of the Act to state the case and refer the questions of law mentioned in the application for the opinion of the High Court. The Tribunal, by its order dated February 17, 1993, refused to refer the question of law for the opinion of the High Court on the ground that the findings arrived at by the Tribunal are purely findings of fact which do not give rise to any question of law fit to be referred for the opinion of the High Court. The Tribunal, therefore, declined to refer the proposed questions for the opinion of the High Court.